UMASS/AMHERST 


315Dt.bDDSflS5Dfl7 


i 


i 


^iP'!!ii'l'liiii''iii'     • 


iiiii: 


'!i , 

tiii  i-iii:  ; 
!  i! !!  i  i 


mm.. 


ii*^ 


iiPilP 

ill    i-.  .^:'il      lO    ;■.  ■ 


1 J '      '   lit   ' ' 


H.'MM'.'jjfJtJ* 


iP'iiii  piiiSI 


Digitized  by  the  Internet  Archive 

in  2010  with  funding  from 

Boston  Library  Consortium  IVIember  Libraries 


http://www.archive.org/details/farmersexperiencOOmass 


NOV  5-  1914 


A  Farmer's 
Experience 


With  Lime 


By  PROF.  W.  F.  MASSEY 


Prof.  W,  F.  Nassey,  a  seventy-five  year  old  experienced 
practical  farmer,  is  an  agricultural  and  horticultural  expert 
and  counsellor,  agricultural  editor  of  the  '*Times  Dispatch," 
and  associate  editor  on  the  "Progressive  Farmer,"  "Southern 
Planter"  and  "Market  Growers'  Journal." 


PROF.  W.  F.    MASSEY 

The  Progressive  Fanner,  Raleigh,  N.  C,  said  of  Prof.  Massey: 
"The  value  of  his  advice  to  Farmers  can  be  counted  in  millions,  nnd 
ik^y  wiU  soKoe  ^^y  buj|4  a  inonument  to  him;'' 


A  Farmer's  Experience  With 
Lime 


By  Prof.  W.  F.  Massey 


A  man  with  a  college  education,  who  has  spent  more  than 
fifty  years  in  practical  cultivation  of  the  soil  and  in  the  study  of 
its  needs,  will  naturally  have  learned  something  in  regard  to  the 
proper  treatment  of  the  soils.  Especially  will  this  be  true  when 
the  experience  has  been  gained  on  a  great  variety  of  soils  and  in 
different  climates. 

The  Scientist's  Puzzle 

One  of  the  things  ih at  I  have  learned  has  been  that  Nature, 
in  her  laboratory,  often  sets  at  naught  the  conclusions  which 
men  form  from  the  work  they  do  in  their  little -laboratories. 
What  is  really  going  on  in  Nature's  soil  laboratory  has  always 
been  the  great  puzzle  to  the  scientist. 

Popular  Crazes 

In  my  long  experience  as  a  cultivator  of  the  soil,  and'  au 
earnest  student  of  agriculture,  I  have  seen  many  popular  crazes 
in  regard  to  artificial  applications  to  the  soil  to  increase  "pro- 
duction. Many  years  ago  in  the  North,  especially  in  New 
York  and  Pennsylvania,  farmers  went  completely  crazy  over  the 
use  of  plaster,  the  sulphate  of  lime.  They  tound  that,  for  some 
reason  which  they  did  not  understand,  plaster  had  a  good  effect, 
and  they  jumped  to  the  conclusion  that  all  they  had  to  do  to 
maintain  and  increase  the  productiveness  of  their  land   was  to 


keep  putting  plaster  on  it.  And  wherever  there  was  a  natural 
deposit  of  gvpsum  they  went  to  grinding  t)laster,  from  New 
York  to  Southwest  Virginia,  and  importing  it  from  Nova  Scotia. 
In  a  few  years  they  found  that  plaster  no  longer  had  the  .effect 
it  hadjat  first,  and  then  the  first'lime  craze  started.  The  Penn- 
sylvania farmers- found  that  lime  had  a  wonderful  effect  on  their 
land,  and  at  once,  as  in  the  craze  for  plaster,  they  jumped  to  t4ie 
conclusion  that  lime  was  all  that  was  needed  to  maintain,  fertil- 
ity. As  one  writer  puts  it,  "the  old  Pennsylvania  farmer  and 
his  son  leaned  up  against  the  fence  and  wondered  what  they 
were  going  to  do  with  all  the  crops  the  lime  was  making  them." 
They  built  lime  kilns  in  every  limestone  section,  and  applied  it 
in  hundreds  of  bushels  au  acre  to  the  land.  When  I  was  a  col- 
lege student  in  the  beautifulj,  Cumberland  Valley  the  farmers 
were  applying  about  200  bushels  of  lime  to  the  acre,  j 

Then,  after  awhile,  they  found  less^,  effect  from'r  the  lime, 
the  kilns  were  neglected  and  went  to^ruin,  and  thel  old  farmer's 
son  leaned  up  against  the  fence  and  wondered  what  ■  we.s  the 
matter  with  the  land.  They  then  went  to  using  guano  and  com- 
mercial chemical  fertilizers  with  a  lavish  hand,  and  found  these 
to  have  a  good  effect  and  they  neglected  the  liming. 

My  Own  Theory  , 

Then  they  soon  found  that  the  red  clover,  which  had  been 
so  valuable  in  their  farming,  no  longer  flourished,  and  again  the 
question  was,  ''What  is  the  matter  with  the  land?"  In  those 
days  we  knew  that,  somehow  or  other,  clover ^and..  other  legume 
crops  did  help  the  land,  and  investigators  discovered  that  where 
clover  grew  the  soil  did  in  some  way  ^contaiu- more  nitrogen  than 
elsewhere.  The  puzzle  was,  how  did  the  clover  get  .the  nitro- 
gen, and  all  sorts  of  theories  wiere  broached  iu  regard  to  this 
fact.  Finally  it  was  discovered  that  all  those  plants  belonging 
to  the  natural  order  of  leguminosae  had  on  their  little  roots 
knots  or  ncdules,  and^the"^scientists  began  to  study  these.  They 
found  that  these  nodules  were  the  homes  of  certain  microscopic 
plants,  which  at  first  they  called  bacteroids,  as  they   seemed  to 


differ  in  form  from  any  known  bacteria.  But  finally  it  was  de- 
termined that  they  were  really  a  form  of  bacteria.  Further  ex- 
periment showed  that  where  these  bacteria  were  absent  the 
clover  and  other  legumes  gfot  no  surplus  nitrogen,  and  the  legit- 
imate conclusion  was  that  it  was  due  to  these  bacteria  that  the 
plants  were  able  to  fix  the  free  nitrogen  gas  of  the  air  in  a  com- 
bination to  make  organic  nitrogen  in  the  soil.  Just  how  this  is 
done  no  one  has  as  yet  found  out.  One  writer  says  that  the 
bacteria  simply  absorb  the  nitrogen  and  leave  it  in  the  plants. 
But  nitrogen  is  a  gas  in  the  air,  and  the  absorption  of  the  gas 
could  not  account  for  the  combination  in  which  it  is  found. 
My  own  theory  about  this  is — and  one  theory  is  as  good  as  an- 
other until  proved  wrong — that  these  minute  bacteria  are  of  the 
nature  of  ferments.  The  yeast  plant  we  know  is  a  saccharine 
ferment,  and  these  little  forms  are  nitric  ferments,  oxidizing  the 
free  nitrogen  gas  and  making  nitric  acid.  As  soon  as  there  is  nit- 
ric acid  in  the  soil  it  seeks  abase  either  of  lime  or  potash  or  some 
other  element  and  a  nitrate  is  formed,  and  green  leaved  plants 
always  take  their  nitrogen  as  a  nitrate  and  in  no  other  form. 
That  the  combination  is  made  in  the  soil  and  not  in  the  plant  is 
shown  by  the  fact  that  other  jilants,  growing  with  the  legumes, 
benefit  by  the  association.  Corn,  with  cow  peas  sown  among  it, 
will  make  more  corn  than  corn  without  the  peas,  and  hence  it 
would  seem  that  the  combination  is  made  in  the  soil  and  the 
legumes  get  the  nitrogen,  and  whatever  plant  is  associatetl  with 
them  gets  some  of  it  also. 

;.-    Cannot  Grow.Red  Clover  Any  More 


But,  as  I  have  said,  the  farmers  began  to  find  that  they 
could  no  longer  get  the  luxuriant  growth  of  clover  they  formerly 
made.  Several  years  ago  I  was  lecturing  at  farmers'  institutes 
ia  the  fiue  county  of  Bucks,  Pennsylvania,  right  next  to  the 
city  of  Philadelphia.  I  found  that  there  the  farmers  were  run- 
ning their  land  in  grass  year  after  year  to  make  hay  for  the  city 
market,  mowing  the  land  over  until  finally  there  tf:is  moss  in- 
^If  ^4  of  grass;    I  asl^e4  them  why  they  did  not  addpt  a  ^lioytef 


fotatiou  aud  grow  more  clover.  "We  cannot  grow  clover  an^ 
more,"  was  the  reply,  and  tbey  simply  seemed  to  accept  the  fact 
without  trying  to  find  out  why  clover  no  longer  throve. 

During  th;ii  o'd  lime  craze  On  the  Kastern  Shore  of  Mary- 
laud  one  could  see  the  lime  barges  from  the  Schuylkill  river  un- 
loading lime  in  every  creek,  but  with  the  going  down  of  the 
craze  the  barges  disappeared,  and  one  old  successful  farmer  in 
Queen  Annes  county,  who  had  used  lime  very  judiciously  and 
stuck  to  clover,  said  that  in  his  opinion  lime  and  a  total  de- 
pendence on  commercial  fertilizers  had  been  the  ruin  of  many. 
He  was  disposed  to  charge  too  much  to  the  lime  and  too  little  to 
the  neglect  of  maintaining  the  clover  and  the  feeding  of  stock 
for  manure. 

Soil  Acidity  The  Cause 

But  uow,  wheu  there  is  a  renewed  interest  in  lime  and  we 
have  found  out  that  it  was  soil  acidity  that  mainly  caused  the 
difficulty  in  growing  clover,  it  is  hard  to  convince  the  farmers  in 
the  old  heavily  liming  sections  that  lime  is  what  they  now  need. 
In  the  South  Atlantic  States,  where  theie  is  uow  a  new  impulse 
being  given  to  improved  farming  with  cotton  and  where  the  soils 
long  clean-cultivated  annually  in  cotton  have  become  very  acid, 
the  new  lime  craze  is  spreading,  and  farmers  are  hard  to  con- 
vince as  to  what  is  the  proper  function  of  lime  in  agriculture. 
They  write  to  me  asking  if  it  will  help  their  fall  sown  oats  to 
top  dress  ihem  uow  with  ground  limestone  or  lime»  and  all  seem 
to  think  of  lime  as  a  fertilizer.  Certain  fertilizer  dealers  are 
promoting  this  idea  by  offering  what  they  call  "prepared  lime," 
that  is,  lime  mixed  with  some  potash  and  acid  phosphate,  and 
urging  farmers  to  use  it  as  a  fertilizer.     This  is  all  vvrong. 

Uaburned  Lime  Not  Available 

About  thirty-five  years  ago  I  took  charge  of  a  large  estate 
in  Northern  Maryland,  in  a  beautiful  limestone  valley.  There 
was  a  field  which    was  said  to  be  "clover  sick."     New  all  over 


that  field  there  were  protrudiug  rocks  of  the  white,  coarsely 
crystaline  limestone,  peculiar  to  that  part  of  the  couiitiy.  This 
limestone  decomposes  rapidly,  and  4lie  surface  of  these  protrud- 
ing: rocks  was  coarse,  white  crystals  that  could  be  kicked  off  by 
the  heel,  and  they  washed  off  from  every  mass  of  rock. 
And  yet,  the  soil  where  those  limestone  crystals  were  con- 
tinually washed  down  was  found  to  be  very  acid.  Lime  was 
bumed  and  spread  on  this  land,  and  at  once  the  clover-sick  field 
made  a  wonderful  growth  of  red  clover.  And  now,  when  Joe 
Wing  and  other  enthusiasts  for  the  use  of  ground  limestone  air 
their  ideas  and  try  to  make  the  farmers  believe  that  all  they 
have  to  do  to  make  their  land  fertile  and  productive  is  to  fill  it 
with  tons  of  ground  limestone,  my  mind  reverts  to  that  old  field  and 
its  decomposing  lime  rocks,  and  I  feel  disposed  to  put  a  little  salt 
on  their  statements.  Mr.  Wing  even  advises  farmers  to  use 
eight  or  ten  tons  of  ground  limestone  an  acre,  evidently  having 
learned  its  slow  action  on  the  soil.  Of  course  no  farmer  is  going 
to   adopt   his   advice. 

The  Humus  Destroying  Theory 

The  advocates  of  ground  limestone  tell  us  that  Ijurnt  lime 
■willdestroy  the  humus  in  the  soil.  True,  it  promotes  the  growth 
of  the  soil  bacteria  that  are  concerned  in  the  breaking  down  of 
the  organic  decay  in  the  soil  and  releasing  ammonia  for  the  bac- 
teria of  nitrification  to  piut  in  their  work,  and  it  is  the  business 
of  the  farmer  to  keep  up  a  supply  of  this  organic  matter  in  his 
soil.  It  is  what  makes  a  living  soil,  as  it  is  the  home  of  the 
soil  bacteria  that  are  workiiig  for  the  farmer,  and  a  soil  where, 
as  in  the  old  cotton  fields  of  the  South,  where  all  the  humus  is 
burnt  out  and  used  up,  is  simply  the  dead  skeleton  of  a  soil. 
There  is  another  office  of  lime  carbonate  in  the  soil  .that  is  sel- 
dom noticed."  We  know  that  all  plants  need  carbon  to  build  up 
th^ir  structure.  Green-leaved  plants  get  this  through  the  power 
the  green  matter  has  for  breaking  up  the  combination  of  the  car- 
bon and  oxygen  in  the  air  in  the  form  of  carbon  dioxide,  and 
taking  the  carbon  and  releasing  the  oxygen;  And  this  is  the  only 


way  tiiey  get  carbon.  But  the  soil  bacteria  iiave  no  green  mat- 
ter; they  have,  however,  a  power  that  green  plants  have  not.  They 
can  get  carbon  directly  from  a  chemical  combination  like  calcium 
carbonate.  But  for  the  purposes  for  which  lime  is  used  it  must 
be  in  a  very  finely  comminuted  state,  and  no  mechanical  grind- 
ing can  make  it  as  fine  as  the  burnt  lime  after  it  is  completely 
slaked,  or  as  valuable  as  the  burnt  lime  to  the  soil. 

Burned  Lime  Doubly  Valuable 

A  farmer  in  Eastern  North  Carolina  wrote  to  me  that 
the  ground  limestone  which  he  could  get  in  Virgiiiia  for  $1.00  a 
toil  in  bulk  would  cost  him  $4.20  per  ton  at  his  station,  and 
that  lump  lime  in  bulk  cost  him  there  $6.75,  and  he  wmted  to 
know  which  was  cheaper.  I  explained  to  him  that  the  lump 
lime  would  double  in  bulk  in  slaking,  and  he  did  not  have  to 
freight  the  water;  that  after  slaking  one  thousand  pounds  of  the 
slaked  lime  would  have  a  better  effect  on  an  acre  of  land  than 
a  ton  of  the  ground  rock,  and  it  was  evidently  cheaper  to  freight 
and  cheaper  to  use  than  the  pulverized  rock.  That  the  ground 
limestone  will  finally  to  some  extent  sweeten  an  acid  soil  may 
be  true,  but  what  the  farmer  needs  is  a  speedy  effect,  and  for 
this  there  is  nothing  equal  to  slacked  burned  lime.  But  there  is 
great  work  to  be  done  in  the  educating  of  the  farmers  to  a  proper 
realization  of  what  lime  will  do  for  them  and  what  cannot  be 
expected  from  liming  alone.  In  the  old  lime  craze  they  demon- 
strated the  truth  of  the  old  proverb  that  "lime  enriches  the  father 
and  impoverishes  the  son."  Lime  is  an  efficient  aid  to  the  farmer 
who  farms  in  a  systematic  rotation,  and  maintains  and  increases 
the  ht:mu3  in  his  soil  through  the  gTowth  and  using  of  the 
legumes. 

Lime  Promotes  Nitrification 

So  much  has  been  written  in  regard  to  the  value  of 
the  legumes  in  the  improvement  of  the  soil  that  some  ignorant 
men  have  thought  that  the  mere  growing  of  cow  peas  and  clover 


Would  enrich  their  soil.  A  man  dov^n  in  Alabama  wrote  to  me 
that  what  I  had  been  telling  the  farmers  about  cow  peas  helping 
the  soil  was  all  bosh,  "for"  he  said,  "I  have  taken  twelve  crops 
of  peas  in  succession  from  a  piece  of  land,  and  it  has  gotten  so 
poor  that  it  will  not  grow  peas  or  anything  else."  It  is  not  the 
mere  growing,  but  the  use  that  is  made  of  the  legume  crops 
which  helps  the  land.  They  must  be  used  either  as  manure 
direct,  or  by  feeding  them  to  stock  and  returning  the  manure  to 
to  the  land  that  grew  them.  The  southern  cow  peas  differ  from 
clover  and  other  legumes  in  the  fact  that  they  will  thrive  on  an 
acid  soil.  In  fact,  lime  applied  directly  to  a  crop  of  cow  peas 
often  seems  to  be  detrimental  to  their  growth.  But  having 
grown  a  crop  of  these  the  lime  can  then  be  used  to  great  advan- 
tage in  breaking  down  and  promoting  the  nitrification  of  the  or- 
ganic matter,  for  it  is  not  merely  the  humus-making  character 
of  this  growth  that  we  need,  valuable  as  it  is  mechanically,  but 
the  nitrogen  locked  up  in  this  organic  decay  is  of  no  use  to  the 
crops  until  it  has  Ijeen  acted  on  by  the  growth  of  the  micro-or- 
ganisms which  put  it  in  shape  for  plants  to  use.  As  we  have 
seen,  the  presence  of  lime  carbonate  in  a  very  finely  comminuted 
form  greatly  promotes  the  growth  and  activity  of  these  micro- 
organisms, we  no  longer  fear  that  burnt  lime  will  destroy  the 
humus  if  we  do  our  duty  and  keep  up  the  supply.  Each  form 
of  bacterium  has  its  specific  duty  to  perform.  One  form  breaks 
down  the  organic  matter  and  releases  ammonia  Another  form 
feeds  on  ammonia  and  makes  a  nitrite,  and  still  another  form 
takes  the  nitrite  and  oxidizes  it  into  nitric  acid,  and  at  once 
there  is  a  nitrate  of  lime  formed  and  the  crops  can  use  this.  The 
great  value  of  lime  then  in  the  soil  is  in  its  promoting  the  decay 
and  nitrification  of  organic  nitrogen,  and  it  must  have  a  never 
ceasing  supply  of  this  organic  matter  either  from  vegetable  de- 
cay of  the  crops  themselves  or  the  manure  made  from  their  feed- 
ing. 

Cover  Crop  Versus  Manuring 

And  right  here  I  would  like  to  lay  something  in    regard  to 
farm  economy  and  the  maintenance  of  fertility  through   the   use 


8 

of  legumes  and  lime.  I  am  otten  asked  by  farmers  whether  it 
will  not  be  better  to  turn  the  whole  cjrowth  of  peas  or  clover 
under,  instead  of  making  them  into  hay.  I  have  studied  this 
matter  in  a  very  practical  way.  I  found  that  I  could  grow  at 
least  two  tons  of  hay  equal  to  that  from  alfalfa  with  the  southern 
LOW  peas.  This  ha\'  has  a  feeding  value  of  at  least  $10.00  a 
ton  or  $20.00  on  an  acre.  I  can  feed  that  hay  to  cattle,  and  by 
saving  the  manure  and  returning  it  to  the  soil  as  fast  as  made  t 
found  that  the  manure  contained  over  SO  percent  of  the  manure- 
ial  value  of  the  pea  crop,  and  in  a  shape  far  more  readily  avail- 
able to  the  plants..  The  remaining  20  per  cent  would  certainly 
give  me  a  profit  in  the  feeding,  especially  at  present  price  of 
beef.  Volumes  have  been  written  about  green  manuring,  but  I 
have  never  been  able  to  understand  that  the  using  of  valuable 
feed  crops  as  manure  direct  is  good  farm  economy.  I  have 
alwa^'s  found  that  with  the  most  of  the  legumes  it  is  far  more 
profitable  for  farm  and  farmer  to  get  the  feeding  value  hrst. 

Crimson  Clover 


There  is,  howev'er,  one  legume  crop  that  has  come  into  gen- 
eral use  in  recent  years  which  I  would  always  use  as  a  manure 
crop  direct.  This  is  the  annu-al  or  crimson  clover  crop.  It 
comes  at  a  season  when  hay  making  of  any  sort  is  difficult — 
the  early  part  of  the  season — and  it  gives  such  splendid  results 
on  the  corn  crop  that  I  have  found  it  far  better  to  use  it  in  this 
way.  1  was  on  a  farm  in  Talbot  county,  Maryland,  two 
years  ago,  and  saw  there  a  field  of  corn  that  made  98J4  bushels 
an  acre  all  over  the  field.  I  asked  the  farmer  what  he  used  on 
it.  He  said:  "The  land  was  in  crimson  clover  and  T  turned  it 
under.  I  then,  harrowed  in  1000  pounds  of  slaked  lime  an  acre 
and  no  manure  whatever."  This  was  on  land  where  the  own- 
er's father  made  25  bushels  of  corn  an  acre  in  a  good  season. 
The  present  owner  realizes  the  importance  of  organic  decay  and 
lime,  and  does  not  imagine  that  he  can  keep  that  land  fertile 
with  one  of  them  alone,  hence  the  result. 


Lime  and  Legumes 

Farmers  wlio  have  been  for  years  depending  on  commercial 
Fertilizers  alone  to  make  crops  and  have  neglected  a  proper  ro- 
tation with  legumes,  have  found  their  land  acid,  and  they  charge 
it  to  the  acid  phosphate  they  have  been  using,  and  now  they 
want  to  know  if  it  will  not  be  better  to  use  the  ground  phosphate 
tock.  I  tell  them  that  this  material  may  be  good  for  a  good, 
farmer,  but  very  poor  for  a  poor  one.  That  to  make  its  pbos- 
phoric  acid  available  they  must  have  the  organic  matter  in  the 
soil  or  mix  it  with  their  manure.  I  tell  them  that  no  manufac- 
turer of  fertilizers  ever  has  any  free  acid  left  in  his  acid  phos- 
phate if  it  can  be  avoided,  as  it  would  make  it  harder  to  drill, 
but  that  in  the  soil  Nature  takes  hold  of  the  matter  and  plants 
use  the  phosphorus,  and  the  sulphuric  acid  is  set  free  and  at  once 
combines  with  the  lime  in  the  soil,  making  plaster,  which  does 
not  keep  the  soil  sweet,  and  it  is  the  robbing  ol  the  soil  of  lime 
carbonate  that  makes  acid,  and  the  cure  is  lime  and  manure  or 
vegetable  decay  with  lime. 

Liming  land  never  made  poor  land  rich  and  never  will,  but 
lime  and  legumes  properly  used  make  a  team  that  will  help  the 
farmet  to  maintain  and  increase  the  fertility  of  his  soil.  I  am 
glad  to  see  the  present  great  increase  of  interest  in  lime  in  agri- 
culture if  it  can  only  be  properly  directed,  and  not  allowed  to 
run  into  the  same  old  ruts  that  wrecked  the  old  lime  craze. 

A  Veterinarian's,  Not  A  Farmer's  Advice 

My  attention  has  been  called  to  an  article  that  appeared  in 
a  Southern  Farm  paper  in  answer  to  an  inquiry  from  a  corres- 
pondent who  said  that  he  could  not  buy  ground  limestone  for 
half  the  price  of  the  burned  lime,  and  wanted  to  know  if  he 
could  afford  to  pay  for  the  ground  rock  more  than  half  the  price  of 
the  burned  lime.  One  of  the  editors  told  him  that  he  hadrather 
have  two  tons  of  the  ground  limestone  than  one  ton  of  lime,  but 
that  he  would  not  pay  much  over  half  the  price  of  btirned  lime 
f®r  the  ground  limestone.     He  further  sayS  that   if  the   greund 


ib 

limestoue  costs  over  $2.50  a  ton  delivered,  it  is  doubtful  tkat  a 
ffirmer  should  be  advised  to  use  it.  My  correspondent,  or  rather 
the  person  whose  letter  was  sent  to  me,  infers  from  this  that  this 
editor  would  not  advise  the  use  of  burned  lime  if  it  could  not  be 
laid  down  for  $5.00  a  ton.  I  hardly  think  that  this  inference  is 
justified.  So  far  as  my  experience  goes  I  had  rather  have  one  ton 
of  buimed  lime  of  good  quality  than  two  tons  of  the 
ground  rock.  Good  lump  lime  I  found  to  slake  over 
two'  to  one,  and  1000  pounds  of  this  slaked  lime  will 
have  a  better  immediate  effect  than  a  ton  of  ground 
rock.  I  perfectly  agree  with  the  statement  that  it  does  not  pay 
to  use  the  ground  limestone  at  more  than  $2.50  a  ton  or  even  at 
that  price,  when  we  take  the  extra  handling  into  consideration. 
The  editor  who  gave  the  advice  is  not  a  farmer  but  veterinary 
Surgeon,  and  I  hardly  think  that  he  ever  farmed  or  spread  any 
lime.  He  advises  that  as  we  have  in  the  South  legumes  like  the 
cow  pea  which  will  thrive  on  acid  soils,  the  southern  farmer 
can  increase  the  humus  in  his  soil  without  the  use  of  the  lime- 
stone, and  hence  thinks  that  the  farmer  cannot  afford  to  use  the 
pulverized  limestone  largely  if  it  costs  more  than  $2  to  $2.50  a 
toHJ  and  I  agree  to  this.  But  I  do  not  agree  to  the  inference 
that  he  cannot  afford  to  use  burned  lime  when  it  costs  over  $5.00 
a  ton  for  the  lump  lime  in  bulk.  If  a  farmer's  soil  needs  lime 
he  cannot  afford  not  to  use  it  even  if  it  costs  him  $10.00  a  ton  de- 
livered, and  there  is  hardly  a  point  in  the  South  Atlantic  coast 
where  it  cannot  be  delivered  fromNorth  to  South  for  less  than  that. 
T  do  not  know  any  point  in  Central  and  Eastern  North  Carolina 
where  ground  limestone  can  be  delivered  for  $2.50  a  ton,  even 
when -it  costs  but  $1.00  at  the  point  of  shipment.  Nor  do  I  know 
in  the  same  sections  any  place  where  good  burned  stone  lime  can  be 
delivered  at  $5.00  a  ton.  Therefore  to  limit  its  use  at  this  price, 
*\vould"^simply  cut  out  a  large  part  of  North  Carolina,  a  state  that 
hiis'little  limestone,  from  the  use  of  lime  altogether.  And  while 
it  is  true  that  we  can  grow  peas  and  soy  beans  on  land  that  is 
somewhat  acid,  there  are  other  crops  of  the  farmer  which  will 
not  reach  their  best  development  utitil  the  soil  has  been  restored 
"from  its  acid  condition,  and  there  is   nothing  except  lime   car- 


11 

boiiate  that  will  do  this.  An  application  of  1000  pounds  of 
slaked  lime  an  acre  every  five  or  six  years  will  not  be  an  unsur- 
mouiitable  expense  to  any  farmer  who  farms  right  in  a  good 
rotation  with  legumes,  and  the  results  in  his  sale  crops  will  soon 
show  him  that  the  use  of  lime  is  profitri.ble,  even  if  it  costs  him 
$10.00  a  ton  delivered.  He  can  get  humus-making  material 
into  his  soil  without  the  lime,  and  that  will  but  increase  its 
acidity,  and  he  will  soon  find  that  he  will  lose  in  his  corn,  cotton 
and  other  crops  ever}'  year  more  than  lime  would  cost. 

Fairer  Freight  Rates 

What  is  needed  is  fairer  freight  rates  on  burned 
lime,  for  the  high  prices  in  most  sections  are  due  to 
excessive  freight  charges  rather  than  what  the  lime  man- 
ufacturer gets.  We  cannot  farm  in  accordance  with  mod- 
ern ideas  without  the  legumes,  and  especially  clover.  Even 
our  pasture  lands  in  the  South  will  run  into  broomsedge 
and  sheep  sorrel  because  these  can  thrive  in  soil  conditions 
where  better  grass  and  legumes  will  not,  and  we  must  have 
the  legume  crops  for  the  best  of  forage  for  our  cattle.  The  rapid- 
ity with  which  a  liberal  application  of  lime  will  bring  the  or- 
ganic matter  into  use  was  once  shown  by  an  accidental  experi- 
meat.  I  had  a  field  of  newly-cleared  land,  black  and  full  of 
vegetable  decay.  I  prepared  it  for  corn  and  started  to  give  it 
a  coat  of  lime  after  plowing.  Being  busy  with  my  classes  to  ten 
A.  M.  1  had  the  land  roughly  staked  out  in  acres  and  started 
my  foreman  with  hands  to  spread  the  lime  instructing  him  to 
apply  30  bushels  of  the  slaked  lime  an  acre.  When  I  came 
out,  my  horse  was  saddled  at  the  door  as  usual  and  looking 
across  a  little  valley  it  seemed  to  show  the  soil  very 
white  indeed,  and  I  rode  rapidly  around  there  and  found  that 
they  were  putting  about  100  bushels  an  acre  instead  of  thirty 
I  stopped  this  and  gave  the  remainder  of  the  laud  the  30  bushels 
an  acre.  The  extra  amount  certainly  had  a  decided  effect  ov«r 
the  smaller  application,  for  the  corn  was  heavier,  and  the  pi,*^ 
weeds  that  started  after  the  cultivation    ceasedj    were   twic€   as 


12 

high  as  oil  the  part  that  had  the  stualler  application.  I  had 
simply  released  more  plant  food.  But  the  small  i^raiti  crop  that 
foUow-ed  the  corn  was  better  where  the  smaller  application 
w>as  made.  In  fact  the  heavy  application  had  enabled  the  crop 
to  use  up  more  of  the  plant  food  in  the  soil,  and  I  went  to  work 
»t  once  with  clover  to  restore  the  balance.  'J'lie  thoughtless 
farmer,  under  such  conditions,  would  be  apt  to  jump  to  the  con- 
clusfon  that  continued  heavy  applications  of  lime  would  be  all 
■  that  was  needed.  Red  clover,  or  crimson  clover  or  alfalfa  will 
fix  more  nitrogen  in  si  soil  that  has  been  sweetened  with  lime  than 
eow  peas  will  in  an  acid  soil,  for  while  the  cow  peas  n'ill  grow 
aud  make  heavy  crops  on  acid  soils,  they  will  have  few,  if  any,  of 
the  nitrogen  fixing  bacteria,  for  these  will  not  thrive  in  acid 
conditions  in  the  soil. 

Must  Have  Winter  Cover  Crop 

Much  too  is  being  written  about  introducing  the  bacteria 
that  live  on  the  different  legumes,  bv  inoculating  the  seed  or  the 
soil  with  laboratory  cultures  of  the  bacteria.  Where  these  cul- 
tures are  properly  made  and  kept  alive,  they  certainly  are  effec- 
tive in  increasing  the  bacteria.  But  if  introduced  into  acid  soil 
conditions  they  soon  perish,  and  no  amount  of  inoculation  will 
avail  until  the  sweetness  of  the  soil  has  been  restored.  Inoculat- 
ing an  acid  soil  with  the  legume  bacteria  is  simply  a  waste  of 
money  and  effort.  The  liming  must  come  first  and  then  the  in- 
oculation will  do  a  great  deal  of  good.  Still,  the  fact  that  cow 
pea?  will  thrive  oil  an  acid,  soil  gives  the  farmer  of  the  South  a 
gTcat-'advajitage  iuslartiug  the  impirpvement  of  a  barren  soil. 
The  peaa 'vill  give  him  organic  decay,' and  lime  will  then  Ire 
useful  ill  briuging  in  conditions  where  other  legume  crops  will 
thrive,  A  winter  cover  crop  of  green  plauts  is  vitally  neces- 
sary to  prevent  the  loss  of  nitrate  in  the  washing  rains 
of  our  winters,  and  there  is  no  crop  better  adapted  for 
this  winter  cover  than  the  annual  crim.son  clover,  and  failures  to 
get  a  stand  of  this  clover  are  generally  due  to  the  acidity  of  the 
poil.    \ye  cannot  alFord  to  do  without  this   green    winter   crop 


1^  :i: 

and  valuable  feeder  of  the  corn  crop  because  scmeone  says  that 
we  cannot  afford  to  pay  more  than  a  certain,  price  for  lime. 

It  is  well  known  that  alfalfa  has  thriven  in  thC;  semi-arid 
west  far  better  than  in  the  east,  simply  because  the  lime  has  Jiot 
been  leached  out  of  the  soil,  and  we  liave  only  •  succeeded  in 
growing-  alfalfa  in, the  east  since  we  learned  that  for  alfalfa,  we 
must  not  only  have,  lime  enough  to  sweeten  the  spilr  but  an  .ex- 
cess for  this  lime-loving  crop.  Red  clover,  too,  uses  lime  freely. 
Out  in  Wisconsin  in  1910*two  plots  of  acid  soil  ..were,  sown  to. 
alfalfa.  One  of  them  received  an  application  of  air-slaked  lime, 
and  the  other  no  lime.  Both  were  manured  aufJ  inoculated..  The 
next  year  the  limed  plot  made  2,080  pounds  of  hay,  and  the  un- 
limed  plot  made  1,340  pounds,  showing  a  gain  of  over  55  per 
cent. 

Soil  Aeid  Test 

I  am  often  asked  by  Southern  farmers  how  to  tell  when 
their  soil  was  acid.  Of  course,  the  blue  litmus  paper  test  is  easily 
made,  but  I  often  tell  them  that  the  natural  growth  is'as  certain 
an  indication  of  acidity  as  any,  and  that  where  the  broomsedge 
and  sorrel  come  in,  acidity  is  pretty  certain  to  be  there.  They 
claim  that  a  permanent  pasture  is  not  practicable  iu  the  South, 
because  the  grass  is  certain  to  run  out  and_be  replaced  by 
the  more  inferior  g:rass  known  as  broomsedge.  I  tell  them  that 
if  they  maintained  the  fertility  of  the  pasture  byltop  dressings  of 
bone  meal  to  replace  what 'cattle  have  taken  to  make  their  bony 
skeleton,  and  about  once  in  five  years  harrowed  in  a  dressing  of 
lime,  the  good  grass  would  give  the  broomsedge  no  chance.  This 
has  been  well  shown  where  I  live.  Rig:ht  across  the  road  from 
where  I  am  writing  this  is  a  field  of  deep  sandy  soil,  ou  which 
there  is  as  dense  a  sod  of  Blue  grass  as  ever  gi'ew  iu  Keott^cl^y, 
audit  has  stood  thefefc'r  many  y'e'ars.  Not  a  tussoclj  of  bVpom- 
sedgehas  made  its  appearance,  while  just  across  another  roaU 
from  it  is  a  field  waving-  all  over  with  the  broomsedge.  The 
only  difference  is  that  the  blue  grass  is  on  a  field  that  had 
been     well    manured    many    years   ago  as  a  market  garden, 


.  14 

a  nd  coming:  into  the  possession  of  a  Realty  Company  for  the 
gale  of  lots  it  was  limed  and  seeded  to  blue  g:ra5s.  Another 
block  of  laud  near  by  was  covered  with  broomsedge  and  weeds. 
It  was  simply  dressed  with  lime  and  not  plowed,  and  the  blue 
grass  started  in  from  the  seed  blown  from  the  other  piece  that 
was  never  cut,  and  in  three  years  it  had  sodded  over  with  blue 
grass  and  the  sedge  gave  way  and  disappeared  as  the  blue  grass 
advanced  and  seeded,  for  neither  field  has  been  cut  or  pastured, 
but  simply  held  for  sale  in  building  lots^  and  it  was  found  that 
lots  with  a  blue  grass  sod  sell  better  than  those  with  only  weeds 
and  broom  sedge.  Both  of  these  fields  have  had  clouds  of  lime 
dust  blown  over  them  by  automobiles  on  the  road  made  of  oyster 
shells,  but  still  one  grows  broom  sedge  while  the  other  grov\s 
blue  grass,  and  the  only  difference  in  them  is  that  one  had  burnt 
lime  and  the  other  none.  And  in  all  my  long  experience  in  the 
cultivation  of  the  soil  I  have  fouud  that  burned  lime,  in  connection 
with  the  growiusr  and  using  of  the  legume  crops,  has  been  an  effi- 
cient aid  in  soil  improvement,  and  while  lime  alone  will  not  make 
poor  land  rich,  lime  and  legumes  will  do  it  far  more  rapidly  than 
legumes  alone,  even  if  they  could  be  made  to  thrive  on  acid  soils. 

Releasing  Potash  In  The  Soil 

One  more  effect  of  burned  lime  I  have  not  mentioned  in 
what  I  have  said,  namely:  One  of  its  most  useful 
functions  on  many  soils.  Take  Virginia  and  North  Carolina  for 
instance,  where  the  blood  red  soils  of  the  Piedmont  section  are 
formed  from  the  disintegration  and  decomposition  of  the 
granite  rocks.  Granite,  it  is  well  known,  contains  large 
amounts  of  potash,  and  these  soils  contain  a  perfectly  in- 
exhaustible store  of  potash.  But  this  potash  is  in  a  completely 
insoluble  state  in  the  soil  water.  But  the  burned  lime  will  re- 
lease some  of  this  potash,  and  when  it  is  used  in  connection  with 
maintenance  of  the  humus  or  organic  decay,  the  lime  and  the 
organic  acids  will  release  potash  as  rapidly  as  the  crops  need  it, 
and  the  farmer  is  released  from  the  necessity  of  buying  potash. 
Now,  whether  the  ground  limestone  or  the  marl   will  be    equally 


15 

effective  in  the  release  of  potash,  has  never  been  demonstrated  so 
far  as  I  am  aware.  Chemists,  finding  such  a  large  store  of  pot- 
ash in  these  clay  soils,  have  advised  the  farmers  that  their  soil 
needed  no  application  of  soluble  potash.  This  is  true  when  the 
soil  is  properly  treated,  but  where  no  effort  is  made  to  release 
this  insoluble  potash  it  is  found  that  the  potash  salts  help.  The 
Ohio  Experiment  Station  has  shown  that  on  a  soil  which  con- 
tained in  the  first  six  inches  over  an  acre  more  than  33,000  pound's 
of  potash,  an  application  of  only  40  pounds  of  muriata  of  potash 
made  a  profitable  increase  in  the  corn  crop  and  in  the  oats  fol- 
lowing the  corn,  showing  the  fact  that  the  potash  in  the  soil  was 
unavailable.  Qnsimilar  soil  in  Virginia!  found  that  withtheusfe 
of  burned  lime  and  legumes  I  had  no  need  for  purchased  potash.  1 
have  suggested  1000  pounds  an  acre  of  burned  slaked  lime.  This  is 
not  a  heavy  application,  for  I  have  found  that  a  moderate  appli- 
cation, frequently  repeated,  is  better  than  a  very  heavy  one  at 
longer  intervals,  and  in  a  four-year  rotation  I  vvoiild  lime  every 
time  the  field  comes  in  corn,  having,  of  course,  a  sod  to  turn  for 
the  corn,  and  harrowing  in  the  lime  after  plowing.  This  would 
mean,  of  course,  that  the  farm  is  limed  over  every  four  years 
lightly,  and  in  the  mean  time  the  peas  and  clover  are  maintained. 
It  would  mean  having  a  field  to  lime  every  year. 

What  To  Buy 

In  conclusion  I  would  say  that  I  have  no  objec- 
tion to  farmers  experimenting  with  ground  limestone,  but 
I  have  always  had  such  good  results  from  the  use  of 
burned  lime  I  can  see  no  reason  for  going  to  the  extra 
labor  of  hauling  and  spreading  a  larger  amount  of  the  ground 
rock,  and  I  do  not  care  to  freight  water,  of  which  I  have  plenty-.- 
Hence  I  would  always  buy  the  burned  lime  in  bulk. 


43  / 


OS^-^^-aXTr  of  th* 


FEB251Sr 

1  1  r';^r«!'j 


The 

Home  Mixing' 

of 

Fertilizers 


*S4.< 


PUBLISHED  BY 

WILLIAM  S.  MYERS,  D.  Sc,  F.  C  S.,  Director 

Chilean  Nitrate  Propaganda 

Late  of  New  Jersey  State  Agricultural  College 

17  MADISON  AVENUE,  NEW  YORK 
Reprinted  from  Farmers'  Digest 


The 

HOME  MIXING 

of 

FERTILIZERS 

and 

STRAIGHT    FERTILIZER 
FORMULAS 


PUBLISHED   BY 

WILLIAM  S.  MYERS,  D.  Sc,  F.  C.  S.,  Director 

Chilean  Nitrate  Propaganda 
Late  of  New  Jersey  State  Agricultural  Collese 

17  MADISON  AVENUE,  NEW  YORK 

Reprinted  from  Farmers'  Digest 


Results  from  use  of  Home  Mixed  Fertilizers 
on  Wheat  and  on  Rye. 


Wheat— 14  Bushels. 

Average  Product  per  acre  for 
the  U.  S.  of  Wheat  with  Average 
Farm  Fertilization — 1910. 


Wheat— 37  Bushels. 
The  Product  of  an  acre  of  Wheat 
Fertilized    with    Nitrate    of    Soda, 
Home  Mixed  with  Phosphates  and 

Potash— 1910. 


Rye— 18  Bushels. 

Average  Product  per  acre  for 
the  U.  S.  of  Rye  with  average 
Farm  Fertilization. — 1910. 


Rye — 36  Bushels. 
The    Product  of  an  acre  of  Rye 
Fertilized    with    Nitrate    of  *"  Soda, 
Home  Mixed  with  Phosphates  and 
Potash— 1910. 


History  of  Home  Mixing  of  Fertilizers  in 
England  and  in  Europe 


The  very  interesting  figures  published  by  the  United 
States  Department  of  Agriculture  not  long  since,  show- 
ing the  average  yields  per  acre  of  wheat,  oats  and 
barley  in  the  United  States  and  in  comparison  with 
those  of  Germany,  disclosed  an  extraordinary  and 
humiliating  condition  here  in  America. 

The  average  yields  of  wheat,  oats  and  barley  in 
Germany,  covering  a  recent  ten  year  period,  is  28.4 
bushels  per  acre  for  wheat;  47.3  bushels  for  oats; 
and  34.4  bushels  for  barley. 

The  United  States  shows  an  average  yield  for  the 
same  period  of  14  bushels  per  acre  for  wheat;  30 
bushels  for  oats;  and  26  bushels  for  barley  per  acre, 
in  round  numbers. 

In  view  of  our  soils  being  so  much  newer  than  those 
of  Germany,  and  having  been  in  use  for  comparatively 
few  years,  the  early  soil  exhaustion  of  our  lands  com- 
pared with  the  splendid  returns  obtained  in  Germany, 
make  the  comparison  a  very  mortifying  one  for  our 
American  farmers. 

If  one  looks  at  the  history  of  the  Fertilizer  Business 
in  this  country,  one  may  perceive  some  possible  causes 
to  account  for  these  striking  differences.  The  rational 
use  of  fertilizers  has  obtained  in  Germany  from  the 
time  commercial  fertilizers  began  to  be  used;  that  is 
to  say,  German  farmers  have  always  known  Nitrate 
of  Soda,  acid  phosphate  and  potash  salts  by  their 
proper  scientific  names  and  uses,  because  the  Experi- 
ment Stations  in  Germany  were  organized  in  advance  of 
the    commercial    fertilizer    industry,    and    taught    the 


Home  farmers  from  the  very  beginning  the  nature,  composi- 
FerTiiifers  *^^^  ^^^  precisc  Scientific  use  of  them. 


On  the  other  hand,  here  in  America,  our  Experi- 
ment Stations  were  not  established  until  a  false  and  ir- 
rational use  of  fertihzers  had  become  firmly  rooted 
among  our  farmers  and  planters;  and  even  yet  com- 
paratively few  of  our  American  farmers  know  anything 
about  the  real  nature  of  the  several  hundred  compounds 
which  are  foisted  upon  them  every  year  by  Fertilizer 
Mixers.  The  constituents  of  these  numerous  compounds 
may  comprise  a  group  of  certain  chemicals  this  year, 
and  a  group  of  wholly  different  ones  next  year;  and  as 
a  rule,  the  printed  matter  in  fertilizer  manufacturers' 
booklets  and  on  the  fertilizer  bags  does  not  disclose 
anything  whatever  of  the  real  nature  and  character  or 
composition  of  the  constituents  of  the  contained 
fertilizers. 

We  have  pure  food  laws  which  are  now  fairly 
effective.  Our  Fertilizer  laws  curiously,  however,  are 
most  defective  in  that  they  do  not  show  anything  as  to 
the  percentage  of  Available  Nitrogen;  although  they 
may  occasionally  show  the  percentage  of  Available 
phosphoric  acid  and  of  Available  potash.  The  really 
important  element  in  the  fertilizer,  both  from  a  com- 
mercial as  well  as  an  agricultural  Food  Producing 
standpoint,  is  its  Nitrogen. 

Since  the  cheaper  forms  of  Nitrogen  are  but  im- 
perfectly Available,  and,  in  fact,  sometimes  scarcely 
Available  at  all, — and  command  in  the  open  market 
several  times  the  value  of  the  best  and  most  Available 
forms  of  phosphoric  acid  and  potash,  our  Experi- 
ment Stations  would  do  an  additional  excellent  work 
by  prescribing  an  official  analytical  method  for  Avail- 
able Nitrogen  fertilizers.  We  sincerely  hope  that  they 
will  continue  to  advocate  Home  Mixing  and  the  use  of 
Straight  Fertilizers. 

As  long  as  valueless  fillers  are  used,  involvmg  a 
high  cost  of  freight  on  the  filler  material  which  the 
farmer  must  pay,  and  as  long  as  the  most  inferior  and 


least  Available  forms  of  Nitrogenous  fertilizers  receive 
the  highest  valuations  by  our  Experiment  Stations,  just 
so  long  will  our  farmers  be  at  a  disadvantage  in  com- 
parison with  German  farmers  in  producing  maximum 
crops  at  minimum  cost. 

The  use  of  fertilizers  of  the  highest  Availability — ■ 
in  other  words,  the  rational  use  of  fertihzers,  namely, 
the  practical  method  used  in  Germany,  is  what  we 
must  come  to  here  in  order  that  our  farmers  may  pro- 
duce a  larger  quantity  of  food  stuffs  at  a  lower  price. 
This,  in  turn,  will  react  upon  the  general  Fertilizer 
Business  and  cause  a  tremendously  increased  consump- 
tion of  all  the  best  forms  of  fertilizer  materials,  as  is 
the  case  in  Germany. 

It  seems  extraordinary  that  our  Fertilizer  Industry 
refuses  to  get  in  line  with  modern  progress,  if  only 
merely  for  the  sake  of  its  own  prosperity. 


Home 
Mixing  of 
Fertilizers 


Home 
Mixing  of 
Fertilizers 


The  Home  Mixing  of  Fertilizers 


A  hundred  years  ago  the  farmer  of  America  and 
Europe  had  at  his  disposal  but  few  materials  for  in- 
creasing the  fertility  of  the  land.  Barnyard  manure 
was  then  the  great  fertilizer,  but  only  capable,  as  we 
realize  now,  of  restoring  but  incompletely  the  plant- 
food  carried  away  by  the  crops.  Yet  barnyard  manure 
was  justly  esteemed  for  its  fertilizing  value,  and  on 
many  a  farm  cattle  were  kept,  not  because  they  were 
in  themselves  profitable,  but  because  of  the  manure  that 
they  produced.  However,  for  all  of  the  cattle  kept  on 
the  farms  of  Europe,  the  productive  power  of  its  soils 
was  declining.  At  this  time  the  use  of  bones  became 
prevalent  and  this  marked  the  beginning  of  more  ra- 
tional methods  of  soil  treatment. 

The  Rise  of  the  Fertilizer  Mixing  Industry. 

It  was  not  until  the  second  quarter  of  the  nineteenth 
century,  however,  that  new  and  important  fertilizer  ma- 
terials came  into  the  market.  The  increasing  number  of 
soil  and  crop  analyses  had  demonstrated  the  invariable 
presence  of  the  essential  constituents  in  both  soils  and 
plants;  while  the  numerous  vegetation  experiments 
showed  that  Nitrogen,  phosphoric  acid  and  potash  were 
often  present  in  the  soil  in  amounts  too  small  for  profi- 
table yields. 

There  then  came  into  being  a  great  fertilizer  mixing 
industry.  Peruvian  guano  held  for  a  time  a  prominent 
place  in  the  agriculture  of  contemporary  Europe.  It  was 
not  long,  however,  before  the  supply  of  the  best  grades 
of  guano  became  depleted,  though  this  did  not  occur  un- 
til the  chemist  pointed  the  way  to  new  treasures  of  plant- 
food.  Nitrate  of  Soda,  the  most  valuable  source  of  com- 
mercial Nitrogen  at  present,  came  to  play  an  increas- 
ingly important  role  after  the  middle  of  the  nineteenth 
century.  The  potash  salts  of  the  German  mines  became 
a  marketable  commodity  when  the  last  battles  of  our 


Civil  War  were  being  fought;  and  when  the  great 
conflict  was  over,  the  phosphate  deposits  of  South  Caro- 
Una,  and  subsequently  of  Florida  and  Tennessee,  were 
ready  to  supply  the  third  important  constituent  of  com- 
mercial fertilizers. 


Home 
Mixing  of 
Fertilizers 


The  Make-Up  of  Commercial  Fertilizers. 

The  fertilizers  sold  to  American  farmers  are  valu- 
able in  so  far  as  they  contain  the  essential  available  con- 
stituents,— Nitrogen,  Phosphoric  Acid  and  Potash. 
When  all  are  present  the  fertilizer  is  said  to  be  complete, 
otherwise  it  is  incomplete.  It  is  the  aim  of  the  fertilizer 
mixers  to  supply  to  farmers  both  incomplete  and  com- 
plete fertilizers,  chiefly  the  latter.  Furthermore,  usage 
and  state  legislation  compel  them  to  guarantee  that  their 
various  brands  contain  a  certain  proportion  of  the  essen- 
tial constituents,  but,  unfortunately  for  the  farmer,  they 
do  not  require  any  disclosure  whatever  as  to  the  avail- 
ability of  the  most  valuable  content,  viz.,  Nitrogen; 
hence,  the  attempt  to  state  a  formula  on  the  bags,  or  on 
the  tags  attached  to  the  latter,  is  a  wholly  incomplete 
affair.  As  an  example,  we  may  take  a  fertihzer  whose 
formula  is  4-8-10,  that  is,  one  containing  4%  of  Nitro- 
gen, 8%  of  phosphoric  acid  and  10%  of  potash. 

Materials  of  various  qualities  and  grades  are  em- 
ployed for  the  preparation  of  so-called  complete  fer- 
tilizers, as  may  be  seen  from  the  following  list : 


Materials  Furnishing 

Materials  Furnishing 

Materials  Furnishing 

Nitrogen. 

Phos.  Acid. 

Potash. 

Nitrate  of  Soda 

Thomas  Slag 

Potash  Salts  (From 

Nitrate  of  Lime 

Acid  Phosphate 

Germany) 

Sulphate  of  Ammonia 

Bone  Meal 

Unleached  Wood 

Calcium  Cyanamid 

Phosphatic  Guano 

Ashes 

Dried  Blood 

Fish  Scrap 

Tankage 

Bone  Tankage 

Fish  Scrap 

Cottonseed  Meal 

Horn  and  Hoof  Meal 

Hair  and  Wool 

Leather  Scrap 

Home  Aside  from  these  materials,  there  are  others  that  are 


Mixing  of 
Fertilizers 

10 


occasionally  employed  by  mixers  to  furnish  filler. 


Availability  in  Fertilizers. 

In  the  making  of  complete  goods  from  the  various 
straight  fertilizers  the  mixer  is  largely  guided  by  the 
cost,  as  well  as  the  quality  of  the  latter.  The  question 
of  quality  is  particularly  important,  since  no  high  grade 
fertilizer  can  he  made  from  inferior  ingredients.  The 
conception  of  quality  has  been  gradually  developed  by 
investigators  and  farmers  and  the  term  Availability  is 
commonly  employed  when  the  value  of  straight  or  mixed 
fertilizers  is  considered.  We  call  a  fertilizer  Available 
when  the  Nitrogen,  phosphoric  acid  or  potash  contained 
in  it  may  be  readily  used  by  the  crop ;  and  not  Available 
when  it  is  transformed  so  slowly  in  the  soil  as  to  offer 
but  little  plant-food  to  the  crop  at  any  one  time.  A  strik- 
ing illustration  of  the  significance  of  Availability  in  fer- 
tilizers is  found  in  the  action  of  comparatively  small 
amounts  of  Nitrate  on  grass  or  grain  applied  early  in 
the  spring.  It  has  been  repeatedly  observed  that  soils 
containing  as  much  as  .15%  of  Nitrogen,  or  6000  pounds 
per  acre-foot  out  of  a  total  of  2000  tons  which  such  an 
acre-foot  weighs  and  capable  of  yielding  about  one  ton 
of  hay  per  acre,  may  be  made  to  produce  two  tons  of 
hay  when  top-dressed  in  the  spring  with  only  100-150 
pounds  of  Nitrate.  At  first  it  may  seem  strange  that 
the  23  or  24  pounds  of  Nitrogen  in  150  pounds  of  Ni- 
trate of  Soda  should  produce  this  magic  effect,  when 
measured  against  the  6000  pounds  of  ordinary  Nitrogen 
already  in  the  soil.  But  the  mystery  is  made  clear  to 
us  when  we  remember  that  Nitrate  of  Soda  is  a  soluble 
food  that  may  be  directly  taken  up  by  plant-roots, 
whereas  the  Nitrogen  of  the  soil  itself  is  nearly  all  locked 
up  in  inert  humous  compounds  which  must  first  pass 
through  the  various  stages  of  Nitration  before  they  be- 
come available.  With  some  qualifications  a  similar  com- 
parison could  be  made  between  the  phosphoric  acid  in 
ground  phosphate  rock,  known  as  "floats,"  and  that  in 


acid  phosphate;  or  between  potash  in  feldspar  rock  or  ^^"^^ 
clay  and  that  in  sulphate  of  potash.  '""F  ^ 


In  order  to  protect  the  farmer  against  fraud,  fer- 
tilizer laws  have  been  enacted  in  most  of  the  Eastern 
States.  These  laws  compel  the  mixers  and  dealers  to 
guarantee  their  goods,  that  is,  to  state  on  the  bags  or 
tags  how  much  Nitrogen,  phosphoric  acid  and  potash 
their  fertilizers  contain;  furthermore,  they  are  also  com- 
pelled, but  in  an  incomplete  measure,  to  guarantee  the 
quahty,  i.  e.,  Availability,  of  the  plant-food  sold  by  them. 
The  farmer  is  given,  however,  a  fair  measure  of  protec- 
tion in  so  far  as  the  phosphoric  acid  and  potash  pur- 
chased by  him  are  concerned.  He  is  told  definitely  how 
much  phosphoric  acid  is  present  in  available  form.  He 
knows,  also,  that  the  potash  in  mixed  fertilizers  is  de- 
rived almost  exclusively  from  the  German  potash  salts, 
all  of  them  readily  available.  On  the  other  hand,  he  is 
given  little  protection  in  his  purchase  of  Nitrogen.  To 
be  sure,  the  fertilizer  laws  compel  the  mixer  to  state  how 
much  Nitrogen  there  is  present  in  this  commodity;  yet 
he  is  not  compelled  to  tell  the  exact  source  or  availability 
of  the  Nitrogen  employed  by  him.  From  the  consum- 
er's standpoint  this  is  a  serious  question,  since  a  pound 
of  Nitrogen  costs  about  four  times  as  much  as  a  pound 
of  either  phosphoric  acid  or  potash.  If  the  law  required 
merely  the  stating  of  the  total  per  cent,  of  phosphoric 
acid  or  of  potash  without  giving  the  amount  of  soluble 
or  available  percentages  of  the  same,  how  incomplete 
the  essential  information  would  be  as  to  the  nature  or 
value  of  the  "so-called"  complete  fertilizers.  More  than 
that,  the  Nitrogen  is  not  only  costly  but  calls  for  greater 
farming  skill  in  its  use,  lest  the  yields  and  quality  of  the 
produce  be  unfavorably  affected.  The  Activity  as  well 
as  the  Availability  of  Nitrogen  in  materials  like  leather 
scrap,  hair  or  peat  is  but  one-fifth  to  one-tenth  as  much 
as  that  in  Nitrate  of  Soda,  and  we  can  therefore  realize 
the  necessity  of  complete  knowledge  as  to  the  agri- 
cultural use  of  Nitrogen. 

It  is  conceded  by  all  authorities  that  more  accurate 
knowledge  in  this  direction  may  be  secured  by  the  prac- 


Fertilizers 

11 


Home 


tice  of  HOME-MIXING,  that  is,  by  the  purchase  of 
FertiSers  *^^  Straight  fertilizers  and  their  mixing  at  home  on  the 


12 


Barley 


Pots  manured  with  Phosphoric  Acid,  Potash  and  Nitrate  of  Soda. 


Mm 


Nitrate 
of  Soda 


none 


1  gr. 


2gr. 


3  gr. 


In  agricultural  practice  from  75  lbs.  to  200  lbs.  of  Nitrate  of 
per  acre  is  applied  in  one  or  more  dressings. 


Soda 


farm  in  amounts  and  proportions  best  suited  for  any 
particular  soil  and  crop. 


Advantages  of  Home-Mixing. 


The  practice  of  home-mixing  has  its  friends  as  well 
as  its  opponents,  but  when  all  the  arguments  pro  and  con 
are  summed  up  the  decision  must  be  entirely  in  its 


favor.    The  advantages  claimed  for  home-miocing  are : —  Home 

Mixing  of 

1.  Better  adaption  to  soil  and  crop.  Soils  vary  Fertilizers 
in  their  chemical  composition,  and  in  their  previous  13 
history,  as  to  cropping  and  fertilization.  One  soil 
may  be  deficient  in  available  Nitrogen,  another  de- 
ficient in  available  phosphoric  acid.  In  one  instance 
a  heavy  application  of  manure,  a  crop  of  crim- 
son clover,  or  alfalfa  stubble  may  have  been  plowed 
under ;  and  in  a  second  instance  a  thin  timothy  sod. 
Evidently  a  crop  of  corn  would  not  find  the  same 
amounts  and  proportions  of  food  in  these  cases, 
and  it  is  therefore  idle  to  assume  that  a  so-called 
corn  fertilizer,  whatever  its  composition,  would 
prove  as  efficient  in  the  one  case  as  in  the  other. 

Again,  it  is  common  knowledge  that  some 
crops  are  particularly  grateful  for  applications  of 
Nitrogen,  while  others  are  responsive  to  applications 
of  phosphoric  acid  or  of  potash.  Yet  even  here 
the  soil  and  climate  exert  an  important  modifying 
influence.  For  instance,  clovers  and  other  legumes 
are  capable  of  securing  their  Nitrogen  from  the  air 
and,  except  in  the  early  stages  of  growth,  are  inde- 
pendent of  the  supply  in  the  soil  or  fertilizers.  On 
the  other  hand,  they  require  large  amounts  of 
potash,  phosphoric  acid  and  lime.  Nevertheless, 
certain  limestone  soils  require  only  applica- 
tions of  potash,  while  many  silt  loam  or  clay  soils 
require  only  applications  of  phosphoric  add. 
In  a  word,  then,  no  single  formula  for  any  particu- 
lar crop  can  be  devised  to  suit  all  soils  and  seasons. 
When  the  mixing  is  done  on  the  farm  proper  ad- 
justment can  be  made  to  suit  local  conditions, 
known  best  by  the  farm  manager  after  adequate 
experience. 

One  advantage  of  i/ome-Mixing  is  that  the 
farmer  may  make  any  combination  of  plant-food  he 
wishes,  and  know  the  form  and  availability  of  the 
ingredients  of  his  own  fertilizer,  and  he  will  save 
not  only  the  high  price  paid  for  filler,  but  also  the 
cost  of  transporting  the  filler. 


Home 
Mixing  of 
Fertilizers 

14 


2.  Better  information  concerning  the  quality  of 
materials.  The  present  high  prices  of  organic  am- 
moniates  are  forcing  the  fertihzer  mixers  to  em- 
ploy various  organic  materials  of  inferior  quality. 
Since  the  fertilizer  laws  do  not  require  any  dis- 


Carrots 


Pots  manured  with  Phosphoric  Acid,  Potash  and  Nitrate  of  Soda 


r-%\\<\^- 


Nitrate 
of  Soda 


none  1}4  gr. 


3  gr. 


4^gr. 


In  agricultural  practice  from  2  cwt,  to  4  cwt.  of  Nitrate  of  Soda 
per  acre  is  applied  in  one  or  more  dressings. 


tinction  between  sources  of  Nitrogen,  mixers  feel 
free  to  meet  competition  and  to  reduce  the  cost 
of  mixing  by  employing  inert  materials  like  leather- 
scrap,  hair,  wool  and  garbage  tankage.  Moreover, 
even  the  better  grades  of  organic  ammoniates  like 


Mixing  of 
Fertilizers 

15 


dried   blood,   tankage,   and   ground  fish   are   now  ^°^^ 
adulterated   more   than   formerly.     Home-imxing 
protects  the  farmer  against  the  use  of  inferior  ma- 
terials and  permits  him  to  purchase  his  Nitrogen  in 
the  readily  available  forms. 

Many  of  the  ingredients  used  by  the  manu- 
facturers of  "complete"  fertilizers  are  produced 
directly  or  indirectly  by  themselves.  Others,  like 
Nitrate  of  Soda,  potash  salts  and  basic  slag,  are 
not  produced  in  this  country.  Naturally  the  manu- 
facturers will  use  as  much  as  possible  of  the  ma- 
terials produced  by  themselves,  on  which  they  make 
both  a  raw  material  and  a  mixing  profit,  and  spend 
as  little  as  possible  for  imported  materials  on  which 
the}^  can  make  but  one  profit. 

The  "complete"  fertilizer  manufacturers  use 
large  quantities  of  low  grade  materials  which  the 
farmers  would  not  buy  for  Home-Mixing  because 
of  the  doubtful  value  of  the  Nitrogen  owing  to  its 
not  being  available,  that  is,  indigestible  as  plant 
food.  But  the  manufacturer  finds  them  doubly 
valuable  as  filler,  because  he  can  label  his 
goods  as  containing  so  and  so  much  Nitro- 
gen, notwithstanding  its  indigestible  quality  as  a 
plant  food. 

3.  Lower  cost  per  unit  of  plant-food.  As  shown 
by  the  analyses  and  valuations  of  fertilizers  made 
by  different  experiment  stations  the  so-called  over- 
head charges  made  by  the  mixers  amount,  on  the 
average,  to  more  than  six  dollars  per  ton.  Other- 
wise stated,  the  farmer  who  buys  mixed  fertilizers 
is  made  to  pay  about  six  or  seven  dollars  per  ton 
for  mixing,  bagging,  shipping,  agents'  commis- 
sions, profit,  long  credit,  etc.  The  overhead  charges 
tend  to  increase  the  cost  per  unit  of  plant-food  in 
all  fertilizers,  and  to  a  particularly  marked  extent 
in  the  cheaper  brands.  Home-mixing  enables  the 
farmer  to  secure  available  plant-food  at  a  lower 
cost  per  unit. 


16 


Home  4      More  profitable  returns  from  the  use  of  fertil- 

ixing  o  ize7's    may    be    secured    when    one    understands 

Fertilizers  ,.  ^..  .  e     i     -        ■       ^ 

their  composition  and  the  functions  of  their  single 
ingredients.  The  man  who  takes  the  trouble  to  make 
himself  acquainted  with  the  origin,  the  history  and 
the  action  of  different  fertilizers  is  perforce  bound 
to  secure  larger  returns  from  them  than  the  man 
who  blindly  follows  the  experience  of  others.  For 
this  reason  the  ^om^-mixing  of  fertilizers  is  an  edu- 
cational factor  of  great  importance.  The  farmer 
who  does  his  own  mixing  is  bound  to  observe  the 
effect  of  season,  of  crop  and  of  rotation.  He  is 
bound  to  learn  something  of  the  particular  influ- 
ences of  Nitrogen,  of  phosphoric  acid  and  of 
potash.  In  the  course  of  time  he  is  led  to  experi- 
ment for  himself,  with  different  mixtures,  propor- 
tions and  methods  of  application,  and  doing  all 
these  things  he  becomes  more  skilled  and  successful 
in  the  business  of  crop  production. 

The  opponents  of  home-Tcvhdng  have  claimed,  on 
their  part,  that  the  farmer  cannot  prepare  mixtures  as 
uniform  as  those  made  at  the  factory.  They  have  also 
claimed  that  the  mixtures  made  at  the  farm  are  more 
costly  than  similar  mixtures  made  at  the  factory.  As  to 
the  first  of  these  objections,  it  has  been  demonstrated  by 
most  of  the  experiment  stations  in  the  East  and  the 
South  that  home-mixtures  can  be  made  mechanically  as 
satisfactory  as  the  best  of  the  commercial  brands.  It  is 
merely  necessary  to  screen  the  single  ingredients  and  to 
use  some  sort  of  a  filler  like  dry  peat  or  fine  loam  to  pre- 
vent caking.  The  second  objection  is  not  at  all  borr^ 
out  by  the  actual  experience  of  farmers  who  have  been 
using  home-mixtures  for  years. 

Equipment  and  Methods  for  Home-Mixing. 

The  equipment  required  for  home-mixing  is  very 
simple  and  inexpensive.  It  consists  of  a  screen  with 
three  (3)  meshes  to  the  inch,  and  about  4-5  feet  long 
and  Ij  to  2  feet  wide,  a  shovel  with  square  point,  an 
iron  rake,  and  platform  scales. 


17 


The  mixing  may  be  done  on  a  tight,  clean  barn  floor,  ^°"^* 
and  a  heavy  wooden  post  is  useful  for  crushing  big  pg^^J^g°g 
lumps  of  material ;  frequently  the  use  of  a  sieve  may  be 
dispensed  with  by  this  means. 

Previous  to  mixing,  the  materials  are  screened,  the 
lumps  broken  up  and  again  screened.  The  mixing  may 
then  be  best  accomplished  by  spreading  out  the  most 
bulky  constituent  in  a  uniform  layer  about  six  inches 
thick.  The  next  most  bulky  constituent  is  then  similarly 
spread  out  on  top  of  the  first,  and  is  followed  in  its  turn 
by  the  others  until  the  pile  is  complete.  The  several  lay- 
ers are  then  thoroughly  mixed  by  shovelling  the  entire 
heap  three  or  four  times.  Thorough  mixing  is  shown 
by  the  absence  of  streaks  of  different  materials.  The 
mixture  may  be  put  in  bags  or  other  convenient  recepta- 
cles and  kept  in  a  dry  place  until  needed. 

In  mixing  various  materials  some  knowledge  is  re- 
quired concerning  the  action  of  different  ingredients 
upon  each  other.  Such  knowledge  will  prevent  the 
danger  of  loss  of  constituents  or  the  deterioration  of 
quality.  The  materials  that  should  not  be  employed  to- 
gether in  mixed  fertilizers  are  known  as  incompatibles. 
As  is  pointed  out  in  this  connection  in  Farmers'  Bulletin 
No.  225,  U.  S.  Department  of  Agriculture,  it  should  be 
remembered  that  "(1)  When  certain  materials  are 
mixed  chemical  changes  take  place  which  result  in  loss 
of  a  valuable  constituent,  as  when  lime  is  mixed  with 
guano.  Nitrogen  escapes ;  or  in  a  change  of  a  constituent 
to  a  less  available  form,  as  when  lime  is  mixed  with 
superphosphates,  the  phosphoric  acid  is  made  less  sol- 
uble; and  (2),  mixtures  of  certain  materials,  as,  for 
example,  potash  salts  and  Thomas  Slag,  are  likely  to 
harden  or  'cake,'  and  thus  become  difScut  to  handle  if 
kept  some  time  after  mixing." 

Potash  salts  may  be  mixed  with  Thomas  phos- 
phate powder,  but  acid  phosphate  should  not  be  mixed 
with  quick  lime,  not  sulphate  of  ammonia  with  basic 
slag. 

The  modern  farmer  in  America  is  beginning  to 
understand  the  nature  of  Straight  Fertilizers  as  well  as 


18 


Home  |.jjg  farmer  in  Germany.     He  knows  fairly  well  the 
Ferti"kers  character  and  qualities  of  the  materials  now  used  in 
mixing  fertilizers;  and  can  thus  form  his  own  judgment 
as  to  what  is  best  for  the  different  crops  and  soils. 

It  would  be  better  to  spread  fertilizers  broadcast  by 
hand,  or  by  a  top-dressing  machine ;  fertilizer  drills,  as  a 
rule,  are  not  of  sufficient  capacity.  Broadcasting  is 
always  a  more  thorough  method  of  applying  fertilizers, 
and  gives  the  following  crops  a  better  opportunity  to 
utilize  all  the  material  and  prevents  too  much  concentra- 
tion of  plant  food  by  the  plants.  Broadcasting  always 
gives  a  better  root  development,  since  the  plants  are 
compelled  to  utilize  a  larger  feeding  area  to  no  disad- 
vantage, since  it  is  nature's  way. 

It  is  generally  better  to  harrow  in  fertilizers  after 
they  are  applied,  except  on  the  seeded  crops  or  on  sod 
lands. 


Calculations  for  Mixing  Fertilizers. 

As  an  example  of  how  the  proportions  of  the  differ- 
ent ingredients  in  a  mixture  may  be  calculated,  let  it  be 
assumed  that  a  farmer  wishes  to  prepare  a  4-8-10  potato 
fertilizer  out  of  Nitrate  of  Soda  containing  15.5  per 
cent,  of  Nitrogen;  acid  phosphate  containing  16  per 
cent,  of  Available  phosphoric  acid  and  sulphate  of  potash 
containing  50  per  cent,  of  actual  potash.  Remembering 
that  each  one  hundred  pounds  of  the  required  mixture  is 
to  contain  4  pounds  of  Available  Nitrogen,  8  pounds  of 
Available  phosphoric  acid  and  10  pounds  of  Available 
potash,  we  may  best  determine  the  amounts  of  each  per 
ton  by  multiplying  the  given  figures  by  20.    Thus : — 

4  X  20=  80  lbs.  Available  Nitrogen  per  ton 
8  X  20=160    "     Available  phosphoric  acid  per  ton 
10  X  20=200    "     Available  potash  per  ton 

Hence  each  ton  of  the  mixture  is  to  contain  80 
pounds  of  Available  Nitrogen,  160  pounds  of  Available 
jrfiosphoric  acid  and  200  pounds  of  available  potash. 


We  next  determine  the  amount  of  each  ingredient  ^°^« 


necessary  to  furnish  the  required  quantities  of  plant- 
food.  Since  each  one  hundred  pounds  of  Nitrate  con- 
tains 15.5  pounds  of  Nitrogen,  the  80  pounds  of  Nitro- 
gen required  would  represent  as  many  hundreds  or  frac- 
tions thereof,  as  15.5  is  contained  in  80;  or 

(  80x100)^.155(15.5%)==  5.16  cwt.=  516  lbs.  Nitrate  of  Soda 
(160x  100)-^.16  (  16%)  =  10.00cwt.  =  1000  lbs.  Acid  Phosphate 
(200x100)^.50     (     50%)=  4.00cwt.=   400  lbs.  Sulphate    of 

Phosphate 
Filler  0.84  cwt.=      84  lbs.  Fine    dry    loam, 

or  Peat,  or  land 
plaster 


20.00  cwt.=:2000  lbs. 

Calculations  of  Formula  of  Mixed  Materials. 

It  is  desirable,  at  times  to  determine  the  propor- 
tions of  plant-food  in  any  given  mixture.  For  instance, 
a  mixture  is  made  up  of  200  pounds  of  Nitrate  of  Soda, 
200  pounds  of  tankage,  1,000  pounds  of  acid  phosphate 
and  600  pounds  of  kainit,  what  is  the  formula  if  the 
Nitrate  contains  15.5  per  cent,  of  Available  Nitrogen, 
the  tankage  5  per  cent,  of  Nitrogen  and  10  per  cent,  of 
phosphoric  acid,  the  acid  phosphate  16  per  cent,  of  phos- 
phoric acid,  and  the  kainit  12.5  per  cent,  of  potash.  The 
amounts  of  plant  food  would  then  be : — 

Nitrogen    Phos.  Acid  Potash 

lbs.  lbs.            lbs. 

Nitrate   of    Soda 200  lbs.  x  .155(15. 5%)=31 

Tankage     200  lbs.  x  .05    (       5%)  =  10 

Tankage     200  lbs.  x  .10    (     10%)=..  20 

Acid    Phosphate     .  .  .  100  lbs.  x  .16    (     16%)  =  ..  160 

Kainit     60  lbs.  X. 125(12. 5%)  =  .  .  ..                75 

Total 41  180  75 

A  ton  of  the  mixture  would  thus  contain  41  pounds 
of  Nitrogen,  180  pounds  of  phosphoric  acid  and  75 
pounds  of  potash.  To  get  the  weight  per  hundred  we 
divide  each  of  these  amounts  by  20,  obtaining  a  formula 
that  may  be  represented  by  2-9-3|. 


Mixing  of 
Fertilizers 

19 


Home  xo  Calculate  the  Value  of  Mixed  Fertilizers. 

Mixing  of 


Fertilizers 


20 


Assuming  that  Nitrate  of  Soda,  containing  15.5 
per  cent,  of  Nitrogen,  can  be  bought  for  $52.00  per  ton; 
acid  phosphate  with  16  per  cent.  Available  phosphoric 
acid  at  $7.75  per  ton;  and  sulphate  of  potash  with  50 
per  cent,  of  potash  at  $41.00  per  ton,  what  would  be  the 
value  of  a  mixed  fertilizer  guaranteed  to  contain  3.25 
per  cent,  of  Nitrogen,  6  per  cent,  of  Available  phos- 
phoric acid  and  10  per  cent,  of  potash. 

As  a  prehminary  step  we  have  to  determine  the  cost 
per  pound  of  the  constituents  in  the  straight  fertilizers. 
Thus:— 

One  ton  of  Nitrate.  .  .2000  lbs.  x  .155(15.5%)==  310  lbs.  Available 

Nitrogen 
$52.00-^310  lbs.=$0.168  per  pound 
One  ton  of  Acid 

Phosphate    2000lbs.  x.l6   (    16%)=  320  lbs.  Phos.  Acid 

$7.75^320  lbs.=$0.024.  per  pound 
One  ton  of  Sulphate 

of  Potash   2000  lbs.  x  .50   (    50%)=  1000  lbs.  Sulphate 

of  Potash 
$41.00^1000  lbs.=$0.041  per  pound 

Next  comes  the  determination  of  the  total  plant- 
food  in  the  mixed  fertilizer.    Thus : — 

2000  lbs.  X  .0325(3.25%)=  65  lbs.  Nitrogen  at  .  .  .$0.168=$10.92 
2000  lbs.  X. 06  (  6%)  =  120lbs.Phos.  Acid  at.  .$0,024.=  2.88 
2000  lbs.  X. 10      (     10%)=200lbs.  Sul.    Potash    at. $0,041=      8.20 

$22.00 

Assuming  that  all  the  Nitrogen  in  the  mixed  fer- 
tilizer was  derived  from  Nitrate,  the  value  per  ton  would 
be  $22.00,  exclusive  of  the  cost  of  mixing  and  bagging. 


Straight  Fertilizer  Formulas  for  Farm, 
Fruit,  and  Market  Garden  Crops. 


Home 
Mixing  of 
Fertilizers 

21 


The  primary  object  in  the  preparation  of  fertihzer 
formulas  is  to  show  the  kinds  and  amounts  of  materials 
to  use  in  order  to  provide  in  a  mixture  good  forms  and 
proportions  of  the  constituents,  which  shall  be  in  good 
mechanical  condition.  It  is  not  believed  that  any  one 
formula  is  the  best  for.  all  conditions,  these  vary  as 
widely  as  the  soils  and  different  methods  of  manage- 
ment. 


Substitutions  That  May  Be  Made. 

It  is  not  intended  that  the  kinds  of  materials  shall 
be  absolutely  adhered  to,  for  in  many  cases  substitutions 
of  others  may  be  made  not  only  without  materially 
changing  the  composition  of  the  resultant  mixture,  but 
which  may  also  reduce  its  actual  cost.  For  example, 
tankage  or  dried  ground  fish  may  be  substituted  for  cot- 
ton-seed meal  in  any  mixture,  and  if  the  right  grades  are 
obtained,  will  substitute  the  amount  of  nitrogen  in  it, 
though  it  may  be  in  a  slightly  less  Available  form;  be- 
sides, the  former  contain  considerably  more  phosphoric 
acid.  In  other  instances,  dried  blood  may  be  substi- 
tuted with  advantage  for  the  tankage  or  cotton-seed 
meal,  though  naturally  one  pound  of  high  grade  blood 
will  furnish  practically  twice  as  much  nitrogen  as  one 
pound  of  the  others.  Again,  the  bone  tankage,  which 
is  quite  similar  to  ground  bone  in  its  composition,  may  be 
substituted  for  bone,  and  vice  versa,  the  substitution  de- 
pending upon  the  cost,  as  the  Availability  of  the  constit- 
uents is  not  materially  different.  In  the  case  of  potash, 
the  sulphate  may  be  substituted  for  the  muriate  without 
changing  the  percentage  of  actual  potash  in  the  mixture ; 
whereas  if  kainit  is  substituted  for  the  higher  grades, 
four  times  the  weight  must  be  included  in  order  to  obtain 
the  same  amount  of  potash,  and  the  amount  of  the  mix- 


Mixing  of 
Fertilizers 

22 


Home  j-^pg  applied  per  acre  must  be  doubled  in  order  to  obtain 
the  same  number  of  pounds  of  the  constituents  for  a 
given  area.    For  example,  if  in  a  mixture  of 

Nitrate  of  Soda    100  lbs. 

Ground  Bone    100  lbs. 

Sulphate  of  Potash   100  lbs. 

400  pounds  of  kainit  is  substituted  for  the  100  pounds  of 
sulphate  of  potash,  the  percentage  composition  of  the 
mixture  would  be  just  one-half  the  former,  as  the  con- 
stituents are  distributed  throughout  twice  the  weight. 

Importance  of  Mechanical  Condition. 

In  the  next  place,  care  should  be  exercised  in  the 
preparation  of  mixtures,  in  order  to  obtain  good  mechan- 
ical condition.  It  is  sometimes  a  difficult  matter  to  ob- 
tain a  dry  mixture  from  the  use  of  purely  mineral  fer- 
tilizing materials,  as  superphosphates,  and  muriate  of 
potash,  or  kainit — it  is  apt  to  become  pasty  in  the  drill 
or  planter,  whereas,  if  some  dry  material,  as  bone  or 
tankage,  is  added,  the  mixture  is  much  improved  and 
the  composition  not  materially  affected. 

The  Kinds  and  Amounts  to  Apply. 

It  should  also  be  remembered  that  the  suggestions 
in  reference  both  to  the  particular  form  of  the  constitu- 
ents and  the  amounts  to  be  applied  have  reference  to 
their  application  under  average  conditions  of  soil  and 
methods  of  practice,  and  as  a  supplement  to  the  manures 
of  the  farm.  Where  a  definite  system  of  rotation  is  used, 
and  the  materials  are  applied  with  the  purpose  of  pro- 
viding the  specific  crop  with  the  constituents  especiallj?^ 
needed,  the  formulas  may  be  very  materially  changed. 
Where  the  condition  of  soil  is  not  good,  or  where  man- 
ures are  not  used,  the  amounts  recommended  should  be 
largely  increased,  practically  doubled  in  most  cases,  and 
also,  particularly  for  the  cereals,  a  greater  proportion  of 
nitrogen  should  be  used.  As  a  rule,  soils  that  are  not  in 
good  condition  will  require  a  larger  application  of  fer- 
tilizers to  obtain  the  same  unit  of  increase  than  those  in 


good  condition,  because  in  the  first  case  they  do  not 
permit  the  ready  penetration  of  the  roots  and  the  easy 
distribution  of  the  constituents.  The  indiscriminate 
use  of  fertihzers  on  poor  soils  is  seldom  followed 
by  as  large  a  return  per  unit  of  plant  food  applied  as 
where  systematic  methods  obtain. 

Methods  of  Application. 

The  method  of  appHcation  should  depend  upon  the 
character  of  the  soil,  the  crop  and  the  material.  On  good 
soils  and  for  crops  which  require  large  quantities,  a  part 
at  least,  of  the  material  should  be  applied  broadcast  and 
thoroughly  worked  into  the  surface-soil;  the  remainder 
may  be  used  in  the  row  at  the  time  of  seeding  or  setting 
the  plants.  It  is  particularly  desirable  that  formulas 
that  are  rich  in  potash  should  be  in  part  broadcasted,  in 
order  that  this  element  may  be  thoroughly  intermingled 
with  the  soil,  as  the  rate  at  which  this  constituent  fixes, 
particularly  on  soils  of  a  clayey  nature,  is  very  rapid, 
and  unless  thoroughly  harrowed  in  the  fixing  will  take 
place  largely  at  the  surface,  and  thus  not  be  within  reach 
of  the  feeding  roots.  On  sandy  soils,  and  for  such  crops 
as  sweet  potatoes,  the  concentration  of  the  fertilizer  in 
the  row  is  more  desirable  than  in  the  case  of  good  soils 
and  for  white  potatoes,  though  the  minerals  phosphoric 
acid  and  potash  may  be  distributed  in  part.  When  ap- 
plied in  the  row  for  sweet  potatoes,  it  is  desirable  that 
it  should  be  done  two  or  three  weeks,  at  least,  before 
the  plants  are  set,  thus  avoiding  possible  injury  from 
the  excess  in  the  soil. 

Most  manufacturers  and  dealers  in  fertihzers 
are  willing  to  supply  farmers  with  the  materials  sug- 
gested, or  to  mix  them  at  reasonable  rates. 

If  you  cannot  conveniently  get  all  the  materials 
for  mixing  your  formulas  and  can  secure  any  reputable 
brand  of  ordinary  commercial  fertilizer,  buy  a  bag  of 
Nitrate  of  Soda  and  mix  it  with  four  to  six  bags  of 
such  commercial  fertilizer;  and  the  mixing  may  be  done 
on  your  barn  floor.  You  will  thereby  improve  and 
fortify  the  brand  you  are  buying  in  a  way  to  vastly  en- 
hance its  crop-making  powers. 


Home 
Mixing  of 
Fertilizers 

23 


24 


Home  j£  |-]jg  ]^itrate  should  happen  to  be  lumpy,  the  use 

Fertilizers  '^^  ^  Straight,  heavy  fence  post,  rolled  over  it  two  or 
three  times  will  reduce  it  to  splendid  condition  for  home- 
mixing. 

One  hundred  pounds  of  Nitrate  of  Soda  is  equal  in 
bulk  to  about  one  bushel,  or  25  pounds  to  about  one  peck. 


Formulas  for  Farm  Crops. 

Com. 

(No.   1) 

Nitrate  of  Soda   150  lbs. 

Acid  Phosphate   500 

Sulphate  of  Potash   100    " 

Fine  Dry  Loam 250 

1000    " 

Application  at  the  rate  of  600  pounds  per  acre. 

Composition: — Available  Nitrogen  2.32  per  cent.; 
available  phosphoric  acid  8.00  per  cent. ;  available  potash 
5.00  per  cent. 

(No.  2) 

Nitrate  of  Soda 100  lbs. 

Acid  Phosphate 600    " 

Sulphate  of  Potash 100    " 

Fine  Dry  Loam 200    " 

1000    " 

Application  at  the  rate  of  600  pounds  per  acre. 

Composition: — Available  Nitrogen  1.55  per  cent.; 
available  phosphoric  acid  9.60  per  cent. ;  available  potash 
5.00  per  cent. 

Formula  No.  1  is  best  suited  for  sandy  loams  or 
soils.    Formula  No.  2  is  for  medium  and  heavy  loams. 


Oats  and  Spring  Wheat. 

(No.   1) 

Nitrate  of  Soda   250  lbs. 

Add  Phosphate    450 

Sulphate  of  Potash   100    " 

Fine  Dry  Loam 200    " 

1000    " 

Application  at  the  rate  of  400  pounds  per  acre. 

Composition: — Available  Nitrogen  3.87  per  cent.; 
available  phosphoric  acid  7.20  per  cent. ;  available  potash 
5.00  per  cent. 

(No.  2) 

Nitrate  of  Soda   200  lbs. 

Acid  Phosphate   500    " 

Sulphate  of  Potash 100    " 

Fine  Dry  Loam 200    " 

1000    " 
Application  at  the  rate  of  400  pounds  per  acre. 

Composition: — Available  Nitrogen  3.10  per  cent.; 
available  phosphoric  acid  8.00  per  cent. ;  available  potash 
5.00  per  cent. 

Formula  No.  2  is  best  suited  for  use  in  connection 
with  a  leguminous  green  manure. 

Winter  Wheat,  Rye  and  Hay  or  Grass  Lands. 

(No.   1) 

Nitrate  of  Soda   100  lbs. 

Acid  Phosphate   600    " 

Sulphate  of  Potash   100    " 

Fine  Dry  Loam   200    " 

1000    " 

Application  at  the  rate  of  400  pounds  per  acre. 

Composition: — Available  Nitrogen  1.55  per  cent.; 
available  phosphoric  acid  9.60  per  cent. ;  available  potash 
5.00  per  cent. 


Home 
Mixing  of 
Fertilizers 

25 


"^"'^  (No.  2) 

Mixing  of 

Fertilizers    Nitrate  of  Soda    200  lbs. 


26  Acid  Phosphate    500    " 

Sulphate  of  Potash   100    " 

Fine  Dry  Loam ; 200    " 

1000    " 

Application  at  the  rate  of  400  pounds  per  acre. 

Composition: — Available  Nitrogen  3.10  per  cent.; 
available  phosphoric  acid  8.00  per  cent. ;  available  potash 
5.00  per  cent. 

Mixture  No.  1  is  best  adapted  for  heavy  soils ;  mix- 
ture No.  2,  for  medium  and  light  loams. 

Barley. 

Nitrate  of  Soda   250  lbs. 

Acid  Phosphate    450 

Sulphate  of  Potash   100 

Fine  Dry  Loam 200    " 

1000    " 

Application  at  the  rate  of  400  pounds  to  the  acre. 

Composition: — Available  Nitrogen  3.87  per  cent.; 
available  phosphoric  acid  7.20  per  cent. ;  available  potash 
5.00  per  cent. 

Clovers,  Alfalfa,  Cow  Peas,  Soy  Beans  and  Vetch. 

Nitrate  of  Soda   70  lbs. 

Acid  Phosphate 550  " 

Sulphate  of  Potash   100  " 

Fine  Dry  Loam 280 

1000    " 

Application  at  the  rate  of  300-500  pounds  per  acre. 

Composition: — Available  Nitrogen  1.08  per  cent.; 
available  phosphoric  acid  8.80  per  cent. ;  available  potash 
5.00  per  cent. 


Cotton.  ^°"^^ 

Mixing  of 


Nitrate  of  Soda   250  lbs. 

Acid  Phosphate 600    " 

Sulphate  of  Potash   50    " 

Fiae  Dry  Loam 100    " 


1000    " 

Application  at  the  rate  of  400  pounds  per  acre. 

Composition: — Available  Nitrogen  3.87  per  cent.; 
available  phosphoric  acid  9.60  per  cent. ;  available  potash 
2.50  per  cent. 

Rice. 

Nitrate  of  Soda 100  lbs. 

Acid  Phosphate   800    " 

Sulphate  of  Potash   100    " 

1000    " 

Application  at  the  rate  of  300  pounds  per  acre. 
Apply  soon  after  mixing. 

Composition-. — Available  Nitrogen  1.55  per  cent.; 
available  phosphoric  acid  12.80  per  cent. ;  available  pot- 
ash 5.00  per  cent. 

Tobacco. 

Nitrate  of  Soda   : 535  lbs. 

Acid  Phosphate   100  " 

Sulphate  of  Potash 225  " 

Fine  Dry  Loam 140  " 

1000    " 

Application  at  the  rate  of  1100  pounds  per  acre. 

Composition: — Available  Nitrogen  9.40  per  cent.; 
available  phosphoric  acid  1.60  per  cent. ;  available  potash 
11.25  per  cent. 


Fertilizers 
27 


28 


Home  ^g  a  general  rule,  and  subject  to  any  special  soil 

plrtiiizers  conditions,  we  recommend  that  the  above  Nitrate  of  Soda 
mixture  intended  to  be  applied  to  the  tobacco  crop  be 
given  in  three  equal  dressings  or  instalments.  The  first 
of  these  should  be  incorporated  with  the  soil  just  before 
the  planting  out,  the  second  should  be  given  as  a  top 
dressing  at  the  time  of  the  first  hoeing  and  the  last  instal- 
ment, in  the  same  manner,  about  a  fortnight  or  three 
weeks  later. 

Sweet  Potatoes. 

Nitrate  of  Soda   200  lbs. 

Aeid  Phosphate    550    " 

Sulphate  of  Potash 150    " 

Fine  Dry  Loam 100    " 

1000    " 

Application  at  the  rate  of  1000  pounds  per  acre. 

Composition:- — Available  Nitrogen  3.10  per  cent.; 
available  phosphoric  acid  8.80  per  cent. ;  available  potash 
7.50  per  cent. 

Early  and  Late  Irish  Potatoes. 

(No.   1) 

Nitrate  of  Soda   S20  lbs. 

Acid  Phosphate 480    " 

Sulphate  of  Potash 100 

Fine  Dry  Loam 100 

1000    " 

Application  at  the  rate  of  1000  pounds  per  acre. 

Composition: — Available  Nitrogen  4.96  per  cent.; 
available  phosphoric  acid  7.68  per  cent. ;  available  potash 
5.00  per  cent. 

In  order  to  secure  a  satisfactory  mechanical  condi- 
tion, this  mixture  will  require  about  300-400  pounds 
additional  of  fine  dry  loam  for  each  1000  pounds  of 
material. 


(No.   2)  Home 

Mixing  of 
Nitrate  of  Soda    260  lbs.    Fertilizers 


Acid  Phosphate    440    "  29 

Sulphate  of  Potash   100    " 

Fine  Dry  Loam 200    " 

1000    " 

Application  at  the  rate  of  1000  pounds  per  acre. 

Composition: — Available  Nitrogen  4.03  per  cent.; 
avaife,ble  phosphoric  acid  7.00  per  cent. ;  available  potash 
5.00  per  cent. 


Formula  for  Market  Garden  Crops 

Asparagus,  Beans,  Beets,  (early),  Cabbage,  Carrots, 
Cauliflower,  Celery,  Cucumbers,  Egg-Plant,  Endive, 
Kale,  Lettuce,  Muskmelons,  Onions,  Peas  (early), 
Peppers,  Pumpkins,  Radishes,  Spinach,  Squash, 
Tomatoes,  and  Watermelons. 

Nitrate  of  Soda   300  lbs. 

Acid  Phosphate   400    " 

Sulphate  of  Potash   100    " 

Fine  Dry  Loam 200    " 

1000    " 

ir 

Application  at  the  rate  of  about  1000  pounds 
per  acre,  at  the  time  of  seeding  and  an  additional  appli- 
cation at  the  rate  of  about  500  pounds  to  be  made  be- 
tween the  rows  later  in  the  season. 

Composition: — Available  Nitrogen  4f.65  per  cent.; 
available  phosphoric  acid  6.40  per  cent. ;  available  potash 
5.00  per  cent. 


Formulas  for  Fruits  and  Berries 


Mixing  of 

Fertilizers 

30 


Apples,   Pears,   Peaches,    Plums,    Grapes,   Currants, 

Strawberries,  Raspberries,  Blackberries,  and 

Gooseberries. 

(No.    1) 

Nitrate  of  Soda 300  lbs. 

Acid  Phosphate   400    " 

Sulphate  of  Potash   100    " 

Fine  Dry  Loam 200    " 

1000    " 

Applications  at  the  rate  of  about  1000  pound  for 
berries  and  400-800  pounds  for  fruit  trees. 

Composition: — Available  Nitrogen  4.65  per  cent.; 
available  phosphoric  acid  6.40  per  cent. ;  available  potash 
5.00  per  cent. 

(No.  2) 

Nitrate  of  Soda 200  lbs. 

Acid  Phosphate   300    " 

Sulphate  of  Potash 100    " 

Fine  Dry  Loam 400 

1000    " 

Formula  1  is  best  adapted  for  medium  and  heavy 
soils,  Formula  2  for  sandy  soils. 

Composition: — Available  Nitrogen  3.10  per  cent.; 
available  phosphoric  acid  4.80  per  cent.;  available  potash 
5.00  per  cent. 


Formulas  for  Citrus  Fruits  MiTng  of 

Fertilizers 

Young  Orange  Trees.  31 

Nitrate  of  Soda 350  lbs. 

Acid  Phosphate    350 

Sulphate  of  Potash 100 

Fine  Dry  Loam 200    " 


1000    " 

Application  at  the  rate  of  1000  pounds  per  acre. 

Composition: — Available  Nitrogen  5.42  per  cent.; 
available  phosphoric  acid  5.60  per  cent. ;  available  potash 
5.00  per  cent. 

Old  Orange  Trees. 

Nitrate  of  Soda   375  lbs. 

Acid  Phosphate 435 

Sulphate  of  Potash 90    " 

Fine  Dry  Loam 100 

1000    " 

Application  at  the  rate  of  1600  pounds  per  acre. 

Composition: — ^Available  Nitrogen  5.81  per  cent.; 
available  phosphoric  acid  7.96  per  cent. ;  available  potash 
4.50  per  cent. 

Mandarin  Oranges. 

Nitrate  of  Soda   375  lbs. 

Acid  Phosphate   420    " 

Sulphate  of  Potash 80    " 

Fine  Dry  Loam 125 

1000    " 


32 


Home  Application  at  the  rate  of  1200  pounds  to  the  acre. 

Mixing  of 

Composition: — Available  Nitrogen  5.81  per  cent.; 
available  phosphoric  acid  6.72  per  cent.;  available  potash 
4.00  per  cent. 


Grape    Fruit. 

Nitrate  of  Soda   375  lbs. 

Acid  Phosphate    435  " 

Sulphate  of  Potash 90 

Fine   Dry   Loam    100  " 


1000    " 

Application  at  the  rate  of  1800  pounds  per  acre. 

Composition: — Available  Nitrogen  5.81  per  cent.; 
available  phosphoric  acid  7.96  per  cent. ;  available  potash 
4.50  per  cent. 


Lemons. 

Nitrate  of  Soda 375  lbs. 

Acid  Phosphate    435 

Sulphate  of  Potash   90    " 

Fine   Dry   Loam    1 00 

1000    " 

Application  at  the  rate  of  1150  pounds  to  the  acre. 

Composition: — Available  Nitrogen  4.03  per  cent.; 
available  phosphoric  acid  8.32  per  cent. ;  available  potash 
4.25  per  cent. 


Formulas  for  Olives  MiZg  of 


Young  Olive  Trees. 

Nitrate  of  Soda 300  lbs. 

Acid  Phosphate   , 450  " 

Sulphate  of  Potash 150  " 

Fine  Dry  Loam 100  " 

1000    " 

Application  at  the  rate  of  660  pounds  to  the  acre. 

Composition: — Available  Nitrogen  4.65  per  cent.; 
available  phosphoric  acid  7.20  per  cent. ;  available  potash 
7.50  per  cent. 

Old  Olive  Trees. 

Nitrate  of  Soda 260  lbs. 

Acid  Phosphate   5^0    " 

Sulphate  of  Potash 85    " 

Fine  Dry  Loam 135 

1000    " 

Application  at  the  rate  of  1600  pounds  per  acre. 

Composition: — Available  Nitrogen  5.81  per  cent.; 
available  phosphoric  acid  7.96  per  cent. ;  available  potash 
4.50  per  cent. 


Fertilizers 
33 


62d  Congress  \ 
1st  Session      J 


SENATE 


f  Document 
t     No.  76 


mDIRECT  BENEFITS  OF  SUGAR- 
BEET  CULTUREkmKJLRY 


OCT  2-  13 


ku  setts 


LETTER  FROM  AND  DATA  PREPAREQjBgrloTlltixi'al 
TRUMAN  G.  PALMER  CJoUegl© 

CONCERNING  THE  INDIRECT  AGRICULTURAL 

BENEFITS  WHICH  ARE  DERIVED  FROM 

THE  CULTURE  OF  SUGAR  BEETS 


.i'   #   •'^l 


PRESENTED  BY  MR.  SxMOOT 
July  25,  1911. — Ordered  to  be  printed 


WASHINGTON 
1911 


of  th 


11 


INDIRECT  BENEFITS  OF  SUGAR-BEET  CULTURE. 


Washington,  D.  C,  July  17,  1911. 
Hon.  Reed  Smoot, 

United  States  Senate,  WasJiington,  D.  O. 

My  Dear  Senator:  In  accordance  with  your  suggestion,  I  inclose 
herewith  some  data  which  I  have  prepared  on  "The  increased  yield 
of  other  crops  due  to  rotation  mth  sugar  beets/'  a  subject  of  vital 
interest  not  only  to  the  people  of  your  State,  but  to  the  Nation. 

To  handle  this  subject,  it  becomes  necessary  to  compare  the  crop 
yields  of  Europe  and  the  United  States,  and  the  regrettable  feature 
about  it  is  that  such  comparison  does  not  contribute  to  one's  national 
pride. 

A  recent  magazine  article  wliich  dealt  in  glittering  generalities  was 
put  out  under  the  caption,  "The  United  States  feeding  the  world." 
One  of  the  statements  made  was  that  when  we  shipped  our  cotton  to 
Europe  we  sent  with  it  the  food  products  to  feed  the  starving  work- 
men who  made  it  into  fabrics  and  laces. 

One  phase  of  our  all  too  prevalent  vulgar  boastfulness  would  be 
cured  if  we  but  realized  that  Europe,  without  Russia  ("the  granary  of 
Europe"),  occupying  but  45  per  cent  of  our  surface  area,  tills  double 
the  number  of  acres  of  wheat,  rye,  barley,  oats,  and  potatoes  that  we 
till,  and  from  that  double  area  devoted  to  these  five  crops  their  farm- 
ers harvest  lour  times  the  number  of  bushels  that  our  farmers  harvest; 
that  of 'these  five  crops  Europe  produces  more  bushels  per  capita  for 
their  300,000,000  people  than  we  do  for  our  90,000,000  people,  and 
that  during  the  past  30  years  Europe  has  increased  her  acreage  yield 
of  these  live  crops  75  per  cent,  while  we  have  increased  ours  but  8  per 
cent. 

In  the  accompanying  data  I  have  attempted  to  make  plain  the 
fact,  so  well  understood  in  Europe,  that  the  remarkable  economic 
position  of  that  country  has  been  brought  about  by  the  introduction 
of  the  humble  sugar  beet,  the  leaf  buds  and  roots  of  which  in  the  time 
of  Augustus  Cassar  were  used  as  a  food  for  slaves,  and  must  have 
been  considered  very  vulgar,  since  Csesar  delighted  to  compare  slack 
persons  with  boiled  mangel,  "betizare"  dicebat. 

Although  my  study  of  the  beet-sugar  industry  extends  over  a 
period  of  15  years,  during  9  of  which  I  have  been  secretary  of  the 
American  Beet  Sugar  Association,  it  was  not  until  I  began  making 
study  trips  in  Europe  that  the  full  value  of  the  industry  in  its  inter- 
related connection  with  general  agriculture  dawned  upon  me,  and 
since  then  I  have  devoted  a  large  portion  of  my  time  to  a  study  of 
this  particular  feature  of  the  industry. 

Anybody  will  admit  that  it  would  be  desirable  to  produce  at  home 
the  $180,000,000  worth  of  sugar  we  annually  import  from  foreign 
countries  and  our  island  possessions,  and  turn  this  vast  sum  into  the 
pockets  of  our  own  instead  of  foreign  farmers  and  laborers.     That  in 


4  INDIRECT  BENEFITS   OF   SUGAR-BEET  CULTURE. 

itself  would  be  a  consideration  of  great  economic  value  to  the  Nation, 
but  it  would  be  small  indeed  compared  to  the  indirect  benefits  to  be 
derived  if  we  produced  this  sugar  from  beets,  the  cultivation  of  which 
in  Germany,  in  rotation  with  wheat,  rye,  barley,  oats,  and  potatoes, 
has  resulted  in  their  farmers  securing  from  the  land  which  they  devote 
to  these  five  crops  an  excess  annual  yield  worth  S900,000,000  more 
than  our  farmers  secure  from  a  like  area  devoted  to  the  same  crops, 
and  if  from  our  total  area  devoted  to  these  five  crops  our  farmers 
secured  as  great  a  yield  as  do  the  German  farmers  our  farmers  would 
be  richer  by  $1,400,000,000  a  year. 

Fifty  years  ago  Bassett,  in  his  work.  Guide  Practique  du  Fabricant 
de  Sucre,  said: 

Tlie  manufacture  of  sugar  from  beets  is  one  of  the  most  important  elements  of  public 
prosperity.  Resting  on  agricultural  progress  and  the  wants  of  a  constantly  increasing 
population,  allied  by  reason  of  the  cattle  which  it  supports  with  the  production  of  meat 
and  bread,  based  upon  improving  cultivation,  it  renders  to  modern  society  the  greatest 
services,  at  the  same  time  that  it  attains  for  itself  the  highest  point  of  prosperity  and 
glory  to  which  any  industry  ever  had  the  ambition  to  aspire. 

Louis  Napoleon,  when  imprisoned  at  Ham,  in  1842,  said  of  the 
beet-sugar  industry  in  his  Analyse  de  la  Question  des  Sucres : 

It  retains  workmen  in  the  country,  and  gives  them  employment  in  the  dullest 
months  of  the  year;  it  diffuses  among  the  agricultural  classes  good  methods  of  culture, 
calling  to  their  aid  tadustrial  science  and  the  arts  of  practical  chemistry  and  mechanics. 
It  multiplies  the  centers  of  labor.  It  promotes,  in  consequence,  those  sound  princi- 
ples upon  which  rest  the  organization  of  society  and  the  security  of  governments;  for 
the  prosperity  of  a  people  is  the  basis  of  public  order.  *  *  *  "^^erever  the  beet  is 
cultivated  the  value  of  land  is  enhanced,  the  wages  of  the  workmen  are  increased,  and 
the  general  prosperity  is  promoted. 

In  another  place  the  same  author  puts  the  following  words  in  the 
mouth  of  the  sugar  mdustry: 

Respect  me,  for  I  improve  the  soil.  I  make  land  fertile  which,  without  me,  would 
be  uncultivated.  I  give  employment  to  laborers,  who  otherwise  would  be  idle.  I 
solve  one  of  the  greatest  problems  of  modern  society.    I  organize  and  elevate  labor. 

In  1853,  when  the  French  Emperor  and  Empress  came  to  Valen- 
ciennes, a  triumphal  arch  was  erected,  with  the  following  inscription: 

SUGAR   MANUFACTURE. 

Napoleon  I,  who  created  it.  Napoleon  III,  who  protected  it. 

Before  the  manufacture  of  beet  sugar  Since  the  manufacture  of  beet  sugar 

the  arrondissement  of  Valenciennes  pro-  was    introduced    the    arrondissement  of 

duced  695,750  bushels  of  wheat  and  fat-  Valenciennes  produces  1,157,750  bushels 

tened  700  oxen.  of  wheat  and  fattens  11,500  oxen. 

Grant,  in  his  Beet  Root  Sugar  and  Cultivation  of  the  Sugar  Beet 
(1867),  says: 

I  have  said  a  direct  net  profit  of  $20  per  acre,  because  it  has  been  found  in  Europe 
that  there  is  also  an  indirect  profit  on  the  beet  crop  in  the  large  increase  of  crops  suc- 
ceeding it  and  in  the  cattle  supported  by  the  pulp.  Experiments  have  conclusively 
proved  that  lands  now  yield  from  two  to  three  times  as  much  grain  and  support  from 
eight  to  ten  times  as  many  cattle,  in  the  beet-growing  districts  as  they  did  before  the 
beet  was  introduced.  The  great  beet-producing  districts  of  France  are  the  grain  dis- 
tricts and  the  cattle  districts  also.     The  three  branches  of  agriculture  always  coexist. 

If  our  farmers  were  made  to  know  that  by  proper  rotation  the 
culture  of  40  acres  of  sugar  beets  would  increase  tiieir  yield  of  all 
other  crops  on  160  acres  from  20  to  80  per  cent,  you  could  not  build 
factories  fast  enough  to  care  for  the  beets  they  would  furnish.  Grad- 
ually they  will  find  it  all  out  for  themselves,  but  it  is  a  slow  process. 


INDIRECT  BENEFITS   OF   SUGAE-BEET   CULTUKE.  5 

Five  years  a^o  a  beet-sugar  factory  was  erected  at  Chaska,  Minn., 
where  it  since  has  been  operated  each  year,  and  as  evidence  of  the 
time  it  takes  to  disprove  erroneous  impressions  and  absorb  the  truths 
which  Napoleon  pubhcly  proclaimed  a  century  ago,  and  which 
since  have  been  proclaimed  by  practically  every  European  agri- 
cultural economist  of  note,  I  quote  a  local  notice  which  recently 
appeared  in  the  Wabasha  (Minn.)  Herald.     This  notice  says: 

THE    SUGAR   BEETS — WHAT   IS   DONE   FOR  THE   LAND — ^ATTENTION,   FARMERS, 

One  of  the  best  crops  of  "wlieat  raised  in  this  vicinity  this  year  was  that  of  George 
Hauswedel.  The  wheat  was  a  fine  stand  of  good  quality  and  well  filled  out.  There 
were  14  acres,  and  the  result  in  thrashing  was  an  average  of  32  bushels  to  the  acre. 
This  comes  as  a  surprise  to  many  farmers,  since  the  field  was  planted  to  sugar  beets 
last  year,  and  the  impression  prevails  that  a  crop  of  the  latter  will  so  exhaust  the  soil 
as  to  yield  a  poor  crop  of  grain  the  next  year.  Mr.  Hauswedel,  however,  has  demon- 
strated the  fallacy  of  this  supposition.  We  understand  that  the  soil  v/as  given  no 
special  treatment,  and  no  particular  effort  was  made  toward  securing  an  exceptional 
result. 

You  see  that  with  a  factory  operating  in  their  midst  for  five  years 
the  erroneous  impression  still  prevails  that  sugar  beets  exhaust  the 
soil.  Notwithstanding  the  contrary  experience  of  all  Europe,  and 
of  this  man,  and  probably  many  of  his  neighbors,  I  have  no  doubt  but 
what  a  canvass  of  the  farmers  about  Chaska  would  show  that  the 
general  idea  concerning  beet  culture  is  that  beets  injure  the  soil, 
and  that  unless  they  harvest  ''so  many  tons  of  beets  per  acre  at  so 
much  per  ton"  they  will  decline  to  grow  beets.  The  average  wheat 
yield  of  Mmnesota  is  13.4  bushels  per  acre,  hence  the  yield  quoted 
above  was  139  per  cent  in  excess  of  the  average  wheat  yield  of  the 
State.  If  such  a  yield  were  secured  throughout  the  State,  it  would 
add  $84,000,000  a  year  to  the  wealth  of  Minnesota  wheat  farmers,  at 
85  cents  per  bushel.  Each  mcrease  of  1  bushel  of  wheat  per  acre 
in  the  State  of  Minnesota  v/ill  add  $4,500,000  annually  to  the  wealth 
of  her  wheat  farmers.  This  result  at  Chaska,  which  is  reported  as 
being  a  general  surprise,  is  but  an  echo  of  what  one  hears  on  all  sides 
in  the  sugar-beets  districts  of  Europe  and  what  our  forefathers 
could  have  heard  over  there  50,  75,  and  even  100  years  ago. 

Last  September  I  visited  the  7,000-acre  Tachlowic  estate  at  Yenc, 
30  kilometers  from  Prague,  Bohemia,  one  of  the  imperial  estates  of 
Emperor  Francis  Joseph.  Sixty  years  ago  a  beet-sugar  factory  was 
erected  on  this  estate  and  since  that  time  one-third  of  its  cultivable 
area  has  been  planted  to  sugar  beets,  grown  in  rotation  with  other 
crops.  The  records  of  the  estate  show  that  for  the  60  years  since  one- 
third  of  the  area  has  been  devoted  to  sugar  beets,  the  remaining  two- 
thirds  has  produced  a  greater  tonnage  of  all  other  crops  than  did  the 
entire  three-thirds  for  60  years  prior  to  the  construction  of  the  factory, 
and,  in  addition  to  this,  the  stock-carrying  capacity  of  the  estate  has 
been  increased  100  per  cent. 

At  Hatwan,  Hungary,  60  kilometers  from  Budapest,  I  visited  the 
25,000-acre  estate  of  the  Barons  Alexander  and  Joseph  Hatvany, 
both  of  whom  are  agricultural  economists  of  high  repute  throughout- 
Europe.  This  estate  is  equipped  with  the  largest  beet-sugar  factory 
in  Europe,  slicing  3,000  tons  of  beets  per  day  and  using  the  beets 
grown  on  50,000  to  70,000  acres.  While  they  were  producing  sugar  at 
a  small  profit,  the  great  inducement  in  operating  the  factory  was  the 
indirect  advantages  secured  through  beet  culture.  They  grow  3,000 
acres  of  beets  on  the  estate,  which  they  rotate  with  9,000  acres  of 


6  INDIRECT  BENEFITS   OF   SUGAR-BEET  CULTURE. 

wheat,  barley,  and  other  crops.  The  balance  of  their  beets  are  grown 
on  other  near-by  estates,  the  owners  of  which,  in  order  to  secure  the 
rotating  value  of  sugar  beets,  are  only  too  glad  to  produce  large  quan- 
tities of  high-grade  beets  and  sell  them  for  a  fraction  over  one-half  the 
average  price  paid  for  poorer  beets  in  the  United  States.  Their  largest 
contractor  furnishes  them  with  3,000  acres  of  beets,  which  average 
18^  per  cent  sugar,  and  the  price  paid  per  2,000-pound  ton  was  at  the 
rate  of  $3.36,  our  money,  as  compared  to  the  average  price  of  between 
$5  and  $6  per  ton  in  the  United  States. 

I  will  digress  for  a  moment  to  state  that  this  estate,  formerly  the 
property  of  Maria  Theresa's  favorite  prime  minister,  is  the  most 
perfectly  equipped  and  managed  property  I  have  ever  visited.  Aside 
irom  the  120-room  palace,  which  in  summer  is  occupied  by  the 
Hatvanys,  there  are  beautiful  homes  for  the  various  managers  and 
superintendents,  a  small  city  of  workingmen's  houses,  innumerable 
barns  of  great  proportions,  machine  shops,  wagon  and  blacksmith 
shops,  dairies,  electric-light  plant,  ice  plant,  and  everything  else 
necessary  to  conduct  the  estate  without  calling  on  the  outside  world. 
A  private  narrow-gauge  railway,  equipped  with  600  cars,  taps  every 
field.  The  estate  is  equipped  with  an  abundance  of  the  best  agricul- 
tural machinery,  including  numerous  steam  plows,  all  of  which  is 
carefully  housed.  It  is  stocked  with  4,000  dairy  cows  and  work  oxen, 
which  produce  great  quantities  of  manure,  and  this  is  prized  as  highly 
and  protected  as  carefully  as  is  the  grain,  being  thoroughly  rotted 
before  it  is  spread  on  the  fields.  Every  pound  of  milk  is  shipped  to 
Budapest.  The  refuse  of  the  sugar  factory  is  used  to  feed  the  cattle, 
and  upon  learning  that  American  farmers  about  many  of  our  beet- 
sugar  factories  would  not  haul  the  pulp  away  as  a  gift,  they  asked  me 
to  look  the  matter  up  and  see  if  arrangements  could  not  be  made  to 
dry  it  and  sell  it  to  them  for  a  term  of  years.  They  raise  vast  quan- 
tities of  wheat,  but  never  sell  a  bushel,  seven  modern  flour  mills  on 
the  estate,  with  a  capacity  of  30,000  sacks  a  day,  turning  it  into  flour 
and  leaving  the  by-products  to  be  fed  to  stock.  The  same  mth  the 
barley;  a  well-equipped  brewery  turns  it  into  beer,  leaving  the  by- 
product for  stock  food.  One  can  not  imagine  a  more  scientifically 
managed  property,  where  every  farthing  of  profit  is  secured. 

First.  They  secure  the  customary  profit  in  producing  raw  cereal 
products. 

Second.  By  preparing  the  raw  material  for  the  table  and  shipping 
nothing  but  what  is  ready  for  direct  consumption,  they  secure  the 
manufacturing  profit. 

Third.  By  feeding  the  by-products  to  their  own  stock  instead  of 
wasting  or  selling  them  to  feeders,  they  secure  the  profit  from  dairying 
and  fattening  cattle. 

Fourth.  From  their  4,000  head  of  dairy  cows  and  work  oxen  they 
secure  an  abundance  of  manure  with  which  to  build  up  the  chemical 
condition  of  their  soil  and  make  it  more  productive,  thus  securing 
another  profit. 

Fifth.  By  operating  a  sugar  factory  which  slices  the  beets  from 
50,000  to  70,000  acres  of  ground,  they  secure  the  profit  derived  from 
sugar  manufacture  and  also  from  the  feeding  value  of  the  resultant 
by-products. 

Sixth.  By  growing  3,000  acres  of  beets,  they  secure  the  profits  of 
sugar-beet  farming. 


INDIEECT  BENEFITS   OF  SUGAE-BEET  CULTUEB.  7 

Seventh.  By  rotating  beets  with  9,000  acres  of  wheat,  barley,  oats, 

and  other  crops,  the  consequent  deep  plowing,  thorough  cultivation, 

and  aerating  effect  of  the  beet  rootlets  keeps  their  soil  in  perfect 

physical  condition  and  so  greatly  increases  the  yield  of  all  other  crops 

,  that  this  produces  the  greatest  profit  of  ail. 

By  following  the  above  method,  they  are  able  to  extract  the  last 
dollar  the  estate  is  capable  of  producing,  and  however  long  this  method 
might  be  continued,  the  productivity  of  the  soil  would  be  maintained 
at  its  maximum.  It  reminded  me  of  Armour's  packing  house,  where 
he  said  they  saved  all  of  the  hog  but  the  squeal.  The  Hatvanys  own 
two  other  large  estates  in  Hungary,  one  of  15,000  acres,  both  equipped 
with  huge  up-to-date  beet-sugar  factories,  the  raw  product  for  which 
furnishes  the  inspiration  for  this  character  of  farming.  This  is  but 
one  of  many  equally  well-managed  European  estates  where  sugar 
beets  form  the  pivot  around  which  all  agricultural  operations  center. 

At  last,  by  personal  experience,  those  of  our  farmers  who  employ 
correct  cultural  methods^  and  who  keep  a  record  of  their  yields,  are 
beginning  to  learn  what  our  scientists  and  economists  have  failed  to 
teach  them  concerning  the  improvement  of  the  soil  through  beet 
culture.  Numerous  letters  received  from  farmers  in  your  State,  as 
well  as  in  other  States,  show  this,  and  as  showing  that  these  bene- 
ficial effects  are  not  confined  to  any  one  section  of  our  country,  I 
have  produced  a  few  letters  from  each  of  several  beet-sugar-producing 
States. 

On  my  next  study  trip  to  Europe  I  hope  to  conclude  my  researches 
on  this  phase  of  the  sugar  question,  after  wliich  I  will  present  you 
with  something  more  than  a  boiled-down  statement,  such  as  I  am 
inclosing  herewith.  I  then  will  lay  before  you  and  your  colleagues 
and  before  the  country  statements  in  extenso  concerning  economic 
facts  of  record,  the  results  of  a  long  line  of  experiments  conducted 
by  the  most  prominent  agricultural  scientists  and  economists  Europe 
has  produced  during  the  past  century,  together  with  their  conclusions, 
a  record  of  my  personal  observations  in  Europe  and  in  the  United 
States,  and  the  statements  of  such  American  beet  farmers  in  the 
various  States  as  have  kept  records  of  their  yields  and  noted  the 
increase.  From  the  data  already  gathered,  I  am  confident  that  I 
will  be  able  to  present  such  a  quantity  of  indisputable  evidence  as 
to  prove  to  any  fair-minded  person  that  by  producing  our  sugar  at 
home  the  net  profits  accruing  to  our  farmers  through  the  excess 
yields  of  other  crops  would  exceed  by  many  times  the  total  value 
of  the  sugar  produced,  and  it  would  seem  that  an  industry  of  such 
potentiality  for  creating  wealth  should  interest  every  tliinking  per- 
son, irrespective  of  party  affiliations  or  preconceived  contrary  ideas 
of  economics. 

To  the  end  that  we  may  increase  our  national  prosperity  and  at  the 
same  time  lower  the  cost  of  producing  our  food  supply,  it  w^ould 
appear  that  something,  anything,  everything  within  reason  should 
be  done  to  force  or  cajole  or  coax  our  farmers  to  plow  deep,  to  cultivate 
thoroughly,  to  care  for  their  barnyard  manure  properly  and  to  estab- 
lish a  reasonably  scientific  system  of  crop  rotation,  whereby  the  field 
to  which  they  apply  their  energies  will  be  made  to  yield  as  much  or 
more  than  do  the  rejuvenated  soils  of  Europe. 
Very  sincerely,  yours, 

Truman  G.  PalmePw 


b  indieect  benefits  oe  sugar-beet  ctiltime. 

Influence  of  the  Sugar  Beet  on  Modern  Scientific  Agri- 
culture. 

THE  fountain  HEAD  OF  INSPIRATION  WHICH  LED  TO  DEEP  PLOWING, 
SCIENTIFIC  ROTATION,  INCREASED  FERTILIZATION,  THOROUGH  CUL- 
TIVATION, AND  DOUBLED  THE  ACREAGE  YIELD  OF  ALL  CROPS  IN 
EUROPE. 

[By  Truman  G.  Palmer.] 

The  production  of  the  food  supply  of  human  beings  ever  has  been 
and  ever  will  continue  to  be  the  most  important  consideration  of 
man,  and  he  who  makes  a  given  area  produce  a  bushel  and  a  peck 
where  it  formerly  produced  but  a  bushel  is  a  public  benefactor. 

Two  thousand  years  before  the  birth  of  modern  agricultural  science 
that  science  had  reached  a  high  level,  and  the  crop  yields  probably 
were  greater  then  than  they  are  to-day. 

One  hundred  and  fifty  years  before  Christ,  Cato  the  Elder,  the 
Roman  statesman  and  patriot  who  fought  Hannibal  and  Hasdrubal, 
wrote  a  book  on  farm  management,  a  perusal  of  wliich  would  en- 
lighten the  average  American  farmer  to-day  and  teach  him  how  to 
increase  the  yield  of  his  fields. 

Cato  proclaimed  the  fundamentals  of  good  agriculture  in  his  De 
Re  Rustica  when  he  said: 

What  is  the  first  principle  of  good  agriculture?  To  plow  well.  What  is  the  second? 
To  plow  again;  and  the  third  is,  to  manure. 

To  the  farmer  who  kept  stock,  he  said: 

Plan  to  have  a  big  compost  heap  and  take  the  best  of  care  of  manure.  ^^Tien  it  is 
hauled  out,  see  that  it  is  well  rotted  and  spread. 

And  to  the  farmer  who  had  no  stock,  he  said: 

You  can  make  manure  out  of  litter,  lupine  straw,  chaff,  bean  stalks,  husks,  and 
the  leaves  of  the  ilex  and  oak. 

A  hundred  years  after  Cato's  death,  Augustus  Caesar  made  frequent 
mention  of  beets,  which  then  were  one  of  the  principal  foods  for  slaves, 
while  the  leaves  long  had  been  used  as  an  auxiliary  fodder  for  stock, 
and  there  are  those  who  believe  that,  known  by  some  other  name, 
beets  formed  an  important  feature  in  Cato's  crop  system,  just  as  they 
did  after  their  value  had  been  rediscovered  20  centuries  later. 

People  forgot  Cato's  teaching,  and  when,  2,000  years  later,  Napo- 
leon Bonaparte  stepped  upon  the  stage  at  the  beginning  of  the  nine- 
teenth century,  the  worn-out  soils  of  Europe  had  reached  their  lowest 
ebb  in  productiveness,  and  scientists  and  economists  were  in  despair 
because  of  the  insufficient  food  production  to  feed  the  ever-increasing 
population. 

The  genealogy  of  modern  European  scientific  agriculture  reaches 
back  to  the  beginning  of  the  nineteenth  century  only  and  shows  that 
the  beet-sugar  industry  was  its  father  and  that  Napoleon  Bonaparte 
was  the  father  of  the  beet-sugar  industry. 

German  scientists  discovered  the  presence  of  sugar  in  the  beet  and 
perfected  a  method  of  extracting  it,  but  Napoleon  Bonaparte's  chem- 
ists and  economists,  after  10  years  of  scientific  research,  became  con- 
vinced that  by  growing  sugar  beets  on  a  field  one  year  in  four  the 
fertility  of  the  soil  thereby  was  so  greatly  increased  that  the  combined 
yield  of  other  crops  on  the  same  soil  during  the  next  three  years  was 


INDIRECT  BENEFITS   OF  SUGAE-BEET  CULTUEE.  Q 

greater  than  formerly  it  had  been  for  four  years,  and  it  remained  for 
Napoleon  himself  to  grasp  the  tremendous  significance  of  a  discovery 
which  could  be  made  to  serve  the  double  purpose  of  solving  the 
nation's  food-supply  problem  and  freeing  it  fi'om  dependence  on 
Great  Britain. 

By  reason  of  Napoleon's  Berlin  and  Milan  decrees  of  1806,  pro- 
hibiting the  importation  of  colonial  articles  and  establishing  the  '' con- 
tinental system,''  the  price  of  sugar  had  risen  to  $1  per  pound,  and 
mutterings  against  imperial  rule  were  heard  upon  all  sides;  but  these 
rumblings  in  no  way  affected  the  plans  of  Napoleon,  now  that  he  had 
become  convinced  of  the  indirect  advantages  of  beet  culture. 

On  March  11,  1811,  Napoleon  said  in  an  address  before  the  Chamber 
of  Commerce: 

Commercial  relations  witli  England  must  cease.  I  proclaim  it  to  you,  gentlemen, 
distinctly.  *  *  *  I  am  informed  that  from  late  experiments  France  will  be  able 
to  do  without  the  sugars  and  indigoes  of  the  two  Indies.  Chemistry  has  made  such 
progi'ess  in  this  country  that  it  will  probably  produce  as  great  a  change  in  our  com- 
mercial relations  as  that  produced  by  the  discovery  of  the  compass. 

On  March  18,  1811,  Napoleon  dictated  a  note  to  his  minister  of  the 
interior  in  which  he  said : 

The  minister  of  the  interior  will  make  a  report  to  be  sent  to  the  council  of  state,  in 
which  the  advantages  of  developing  the  manufacture  of  beet  sugar  will  be  included. 
All  steps  shall  be  taken  to  encourage  this  culture  and  if  necessary  by  modifying  the 
customhouse  tariff  for  a  period  of  five  years,  or  even  the  possibility  of  prohibiting 
absolutely  the  importation  of  colonial  or  foreign  sugars.  The  minister  will  take  steps 
to  make  trials  in  a  very  extensive  manner  and  to  establish  schools  for  teaching  the 
manufacture  of  beet  sugar. 

The  minister  will  apportion  among  the  different  departments  60,000  arpents  (90,000 
acres)  of  land,  on  which  it  will  be  necessary  to  grow  beet  roots  sufficient  for  the  entire 
consumption  of  France.  The  proper  officers  will  be  appointed  to  see  that  the  cultiva- 
tors deliver  their  proportions. 

The  minister  will  also  advise  the  cultivators  that  the  growing  of  beet  roots  improves 
the  soil  and  that  the  residue  of  the  fabrication  furnishes  an  excellent  food  for  cattle. 

On  March  25,  1811,  Napoleon  issued  a  decree  appropriating 
1,000,000  francs  ($200,000)  for  the  establishment  of  six  technical 
beet-sugar  schools,  compelling  the  peasant  farmers  to  plant  79,000 
acres  to  sugar  beets  the  following  season,  and  decreed  that ' '  From  the. 
1st  of  January,  1813  *  *  *  the  sugar  and  indigo  of  the  two 
Indies  shall  be  prohibited."     (Extract  from  decree  attached  hereto.) 

On  January  12,  1812,  Napoleon  issued  a  decree  providing  that  100 
students  should  be  selected  from  the  schools  of  medicine,  pharmacy, 
and  chemistry  and  transferred  to  the  technical  beet-sugar  schools  he 
had  established  the  year  before;  that  150,000  acres  should  be  sown 
to  beets;  that  financial  inducements  be  extended  to  scientists  to 
further  perfect  the  process  of  extraction  and  to  capitalists  to  engage 
in  the  manufacture,  and  for  the  immediate  erection  of  four  imperial 
beet-sugar  factories.     (Copy  of  decree  attached  hereto.) 

As  a  result  of  the  perception,  determination,  and  power  of  one  man, 
the  industry  which  was  to  revolutionize  modern  agricultural  methods 
not  onlywas  created  but  within  two  years  was  established  on  an 
extensive  scale,  as  is  shown  by  the  report  of  Napoleon's  minister  of 
the  interior  at  the  beginning  of  1813,  m  which  he  said: 

During  this  year  the  manufacture  of  sugar  which  is  extracted  from  the  beet  root 
will  give  us  7,700,000  pounds  of  this  staple.  It  is  prepared  in  334  factories,  all  of 
which  are  in  actual  activity.  *  *  *  Nothing  has  been  neglected  to  naturalize 
this  staple  at  home,  and  the  conquest  is  finally    assm-ed. 


10  INDIRECT  BENEFITS   OF   SUGAR-BEET  CULTURE. 

For  centuries  Europe  had  been  cursed  with  sagebrush,  gravel-pit 
farming  methods,  such  as  our  low  crop  yields  demonstrate  still  are  in 
vogue  to  a  great  extent  in  the  United  States  to-day,  and  while 
Napoleon  compelled  the  peasant  farmers  to  grow  beets  whether  they 
wished  to  or  not,  his  scientists  and  their  successors  developed  scien- 
tific agricultural  methods,  taught  the  French  farmers  how  to  cultivate 
beets  and  otlaer  crops  properly,  and  as  the  beet  sugar  industry  spread 
to  other  nations,  their  scientists  and  economists  vied  with  the  French 
in  this  work,  until  now,  in  most  portions  of  Europe,  everything  is 
farmed  properly,  as  is  shown  by  their  superior  crop  yields. 

At  the  time  sugar  beets  were  introduced  in  France,  European 
farmers  were  plowing  but  3  to  4  inches  deep,  but  the  beet  being  a 
deep  rooter,  compelled  them  to  adopt  deep  plowing — Cato's  first 
principle  of  good  agriculture — and  as  the  benefits  of  it  came  to  be 
recognized,  deep  plowing  became  the  custom  in  the  culture  of  all 
crops. 

European  economists  observed  that  following  beets  the  roots  of 
cereal  crops  which  theretofore  had  drawn  nutriment  from  but  3  to 
4  inches  of  soil  now  followed  the  interstices  left  by  the  millions  of 
decaying  beet  rootlets  which  were  broken  off  v/hen  the  beets  were 
dug,  and  by  drawing  nutriment  from  double  the  depth  of  soil  they 
doubled  their  soil  productivity  without  increasing  their  acreage. 

European  agriculturists  found  that  the  frequent  hoeings  necessary 
to  the  production  of  a  beet  crop  rid  their  fields  of  noxious  w^eeds, 
and  thus  the  full  strength  of  the  soil  went  to  the  crops  they  v/ere 
raising,  instead  of  being  drawn  upon  to  maintain  a  growth  which 
was  worse  than  useless. 

As  a  result  of  sugar-beet  rotation  in  Europe  it  was  observed  that 
where  formerly  it  had  been  necessary  to  allow  the  exhausted  soils 
to  lie  fallow  every  fourth  year  in  order  to  rest  them  and  to  tear  out 
the  thick  growth  of  weeds,  they  now  could  secure  a  heavy  crop  each 
year. 

Once  inaugurated,  the  growing  of  sugar  beets  rapidly  increased 
and  soon  became  one  of  the  most  important  industries  in  France, 
that  country  since  having  produced  27,000,000  metric  tons  of  beet 
sugar. 

During  the  time  that  France  has  been  producing  27,000,000  tons  of 
sugar  for  home  consumption  and  for  export,  worth,  at  4  cents  per 
pound,  $2,364,000,000,  our  imports  of  sugar  have  risen  from  50,000 
to  2,500,000  tons  a  year,  and  during  that  period  we  have  imported 
67,000,000  tons  of  sugar  at  a  cost  to  the  Nation  of  $4,600,000,000. 

We  raise  and  export  the  wheat  from  6  acres  of  ground  and  use  the 
proceeds  to  purchase  sugar  which  we  could  raise  at  home  on  1  acre. 
To-day  it  requires  the  gold  we  receive  from  all  the  wheat  we  produce 
on  11,000,000  acres  to  purchase  abroad  the  sugar  we  could  produce  at 
home  on  less  than  2,000,000  acres,  and  by  so  doing  cease  tilling 
9,000,000  acres  or  use  it  for  other  purposes. 

The  sugar  we  import  contains  no  fertilizing  elements,  while  each 
bushel  of  wheat  carries  with  it  17§  cents  worth  of  nitrogen,  phosphoric 
acid,  and  potash,  and  the  wheat  we  annually  exchange  for  $180,000,000 
worth  of  sugar  carries  with  it  fertihzer  to  the  value  of  $30,000,000. 
In  exporting  5,000,000,000  bushels  of  wheat  since  1867,  and  exchang- 
ing it  for  sugar,  we  have  robbed  our  soils  of  nearly  $1,000,000,000 
worth  of  fertilizing  elements. 


IN'DIEECT  BENEFITS   OF   SUGAK-BEET  CULTUEE.  11 

France  is  the  size  of  our  three  greatest  wheat-producing  States, 
Kansas,  Minnesota,  and  North  Dakota.  In  1907  France  sowed 
16,000,000  to  wheat,  as  did  these  three  States.  Since  the  introduction 
of  beet  culture,  French  soils  have  been  so  rejuvenated  that  from  her 
16,000,000  acres  of  wheat  French  farmers  harvested  325,000,000 
bushels,  while  from  our  16,000,000  acres  the  farmers  of  Kansas,  Min- 
nesota, and  North  Dakota  harvested  but  188,000,000  bushels,  or  11.7 
bushels  to  the  acre  to  the  Frenchman's  20.3  bushels. 

From  France  the  beet-sugar  industry  spread  to  every  country  of 
continental  Europe,  which  since  has  produced  150,000,000  metric 
tons  of  sugar,  worth,  at  4  cents  per  pound,  $13,000,000,000. 

Europe  produces  annually  8,000,000  tons  of  beet  sugar,  consumes 
5,500,000  tons,  and  exports  2,500,000  tons,  while  the  United  States 
produces  800,000  tons  of  beet  and  cane  sugar,  consumes  3,300,000 
tons,  and  imports  2,500,000,  taking  a  portion  of  Europe's  exports. 

Not  only  does  Germany  produce  the  sugar  her  people  consume  and 
$50,000,000  worth  for  export,  but  by  reason  of  better  farming  meth- 
ods, brought  about  through  the  establishment  of  the  beet-sugar 
industry,  her  so-called  "worn-out  soils"  now  produce  30.5  bushels 
of  wheat  to  our  15.8;  59.1  bushels  of  oats  to  our  30.3;  39.4  bushels 
of  barley  to  our  24.3;  29.4  bushels  of  rye  to  our  16.1;  and  208.9 
bushels  of  potatoes  to  our  106.8. 

In  1907,  Germany  and  Kansas  each  sowed  5,200,000  acres  to 
wheat  and  from  their  5,200,000  acres  of  rejuvinated  soil,  German 
farmers  reaped  145,000,000  bushels,  while  from  our  5,200,000  acres 
of  virgin  soil,  Kansas  farmers  reaped  but  68,000,000  bushels. 

Germany  alone  absorbs  one-half  of  the  world's  production  of  potash 
and  the  European  imports  of  commercial  fertilizer  are  enormous. 
As  commercial  fertihzers  aid  the  chemical  condition  of  the  soil,  so 
sugar  beets  aid  its  physical  condition.  When  the  farmers  apply 
commercial  fertilizers,  they  have  to  pay  for  the  fertilizer,  but  when, 
by  growing  a  crop  of  beets  which  they  sell  for  enough  to  pay  for  the 
cost  of  production,  and  at  the  same  time  add  greatly  to  the  produc- 
tivity of  the  soil,  it  is  equivalent  to  securing  the  fertilizer  for  nothing. 

As  compared  to  the  total  United  States  production,  Germany, 
with  an  area  equal  only  to  that  of  Minnesota,  Iowa,  and  Missouri, 
produces  one-tenth  as  much  tobacco,  one-fifth  as  much  wheat,  three- 
fifths  as  much  oats,  four-fifths  as  much  hops,  four-fifths  as  much 
barley,  three  times  as  much  sugar,  six  times  as  many  potatoes,  and 
nine  times  as  much  rye.  In  1907,  German  farmers,  from  43,000,000 
acres  sowed  to  wheat,  rye,  barley,  oats,  and  potatoes,  harvested 
3,000,000,000  bushels,  while  from  the  88,500,000  acres  sowed  to  the 
same  crops  in  the  United  States,  American  farmers  harvested  but 
1,875,000,000  bushels.  In  other  words,  from  less  than  one-half  our 
area,  German  farmers  harvested  nearly  double  the  number  of  bushels. 

If  on  land  devoted  to  wheat,  oats,  barley,  rye,  and  potatoes  in 
Germany  their  farmers  secured  only  our  average  acreage  yield  of 
those  crops,  German  farmers  would  be  poorer  by  1900,000,000  a  year. 

If  on  the  land  we  devote  to  wheat,  oats,  barley,  rye,  and  potatoes 
American  farmers  secured  the  same  yield  per  acre  as  is  secured  by 
German  farmers,  our  farmers  would  be  richer  by  $1,400,000,000  a 
year. 

By  the  expenditure  of  far  more  labor  the  German  farmer  secures  a 
yield  of  beets  2  to  3  tons  per  acre  in  excess  of  our  average  yield,  but 


12  IlSrDIRECT  BENEFITS   OF   SUGAR-BEET  CULTURE. 

the  money  value  of  the  German's  larger  crop  is  less  per  acre  than  is 
the  smaller  yield  of  the  American  farmer,  yet  German  farmers  pro- 
duce 15,000,000  tons  of  beets  annually,  while  American  farmers  pro- 
duce but  3.500,000  tons.  On  the  other  hand,  Gorman  farmers  produce 
30.5  bushels  of  wheat  per  acre  to  our  15.8  bushels  and  the  price  per 
bushel  is  higher  in  Germany  than  it  is  in  the  United  States.  Not- 
withstanding these  facts  we  export  $119,000,000  worth  of  wheat  and 
wheat  flour  and  import  $180,000,000  worth  of  sugar,  while  Germany 
exports  $50,000,000  worth  of  sugar  and  imports  $65,000,000  worth  of 
wheat.  Considering  the  fact  that  there  is  no  crop  grown  the  yield  of 
which  is  increased  by  preceaing  it  with  a  wheat  crop  and  that  there 
is  no  crop  grown  the  yield  of  which  is  not  increased  by  preceding  it 
with  a  beet  crop,  are  the  Germans  wise  in  importing  wheat  and 
exporting  sugar,  or  are  we  wise  in  importing  sugar  and  exporting 
wheat  ? 

When  we  import  95°  or  96°  sugar,  we  are  importing  a  product  on 
which  practically  all  of  the  labor  has  been  performed  in  a  foreign 
coimtry.  To  melt  and  recrystallize  tliis  sugar  and  prepare  if  for 
the  table  contributes  but  little  to  American  industry.  In  refining  the 
3,148,818  short  tons  of  raw  sugar  we  imported  and  consumed  last 
year  there  accrued  to  American  industry  in  office  expenses,  brokerage, 
labor,  fuel,  bone  black,  bags,  barrels,  and  all  other  supplies  $6.48  per 
ton,  or  $20,404,340,  while  in  producing  but  511,840  tons  of  refined 
sugar  from  American-grown  beets  there  accrued  to  American  industry 
$38,388,000,  on  the  basis  of  3.75  cents  per  pound  average  cost.  To 
import  all  our  sugar  and  merely  refine  it  in  this  country  would  con- 
tribute but  $22,842,000  to  American  iudustr}^,  wlule  to  produce  the 
same  amount  of  sugar  from  American-grown  beets  woidd  contribute 
$274,547,000  to  American  industry. 

That  we  have  an  abundance  of  sugar-beet  land  on  which  to  produce 
our  sugar  is  shov/n  by  a  report  of  the  Secretary  of  Agriculture,  in 
which  he  states  that  if  but  1  acre  in  50  of  our  well-defined  sugar- 
beet  area  were  planted  to  sugar  beets  once  every  four  years  it  would 
produce  all  the  sugar  we  now  purchase  from  foreign  countries,  and 
thus  would  return  our  farmers  $125,000,000  a  year  instead  of 
$21,000,000,  as  at  present. 

We  are  said  to  "feed  the  world,"  but  with  only  45  per  cent  of  the 
surface  area  of  the  United  States,  Europe,  without  Russia,  produces 
twice  as  much  wheat  and  oats,  three  and  one-half  times  as  much 
barley,  seven  times  as  much  sugar,  twelve  times  as  many  potatoes, 
and  twenty-five  times  as  much  tjg  as  is  produced  in  the  United  States, 
notwithstanding  the  fact  that  we  lie  in  the  same  latitude,  have  a 
superior  agricultural  climate,  virgin  soils  of  greater  natural  richness, 
and  that  her  soils  have  been  cropped  for  centuries. 

While  the  United  States  often  is  represented  as  "feeding  the 
starving  hordes  of  Europe,"  the  truth  is  that  their  rehabihtated 
soils,  even  excluding  Russia,  the  "granary  of  Europe,"  produce 
more  bushels  of  the  five  crops  of  wheat,  rye,  barley,  oats,  and  pota- 
toes per  capita  of  their  population  than  we  produce  in  the  United 
States  per  capita  of  our  population. 

As  compared  to  Europe,  we  have  richer  soils,  a  better  agricultural 
climate,  more  live  stock  to  produce  the  fertilizer,  more  and  better 
farm  implements  and  machinery,  a  more  extensive,  scientific,  and 
expep^sive  Department  of  Agriculture,  presided  over  for  the  last  14 


limiEECT  BENEFITS  OF   STJGAE-BEET  CTJLTUEB. 


13 


years  by  the  greatest  executive  agriculturist  we  have  produced,  a 
more  intelligent  and  well-to-do  class  of  farmers,  and  yet,  with  all 
these  superior  conditions,  our  combined  average  acreage  yields  of 
wheat,  rye,  barley,  oats,  and  potatoes  in  1907  were  but  21.2  bushels 
per  acre,  as  compared  to  an  average  yield  of  43  bushels  for  the  same 
crops  throughout  the  Continent  of  Europe,  exclusive  of  Russia. 

Our  increased  use  of  commercial  fertilizers  from  $45,000,000  valu- 
ation in  1890  to  $110,000,000  in  1910  would  seem  to  be  inadequately 
reflected  in  our  8  per  cent  increase  in  combined  average  acreage 
yield  of  wheat,  rye,  barley,  oats,  and  potatoes  during  the  past  30 
years,  especially  when  compared  to  the  75  per  cent  increase  in  acre- 
age yield  of  the  same  crops  in  Germany  during  the  same  period,  as 
shown  by  the  following  official  figures  of  the  two  countries : 

Increase  in  yield  of  five  staple  crops  in  Germany  and  the  United  States. 


Germany. 

United  States. 

Increase. 

1878-1883 

1909 

1879 

1909 

Germany. 

United 
States. 

Germany. 

United 
States. 

Rye 

Bushels 
per  acre. 
15.7 
19.2 
24.5 
31.8 
115.5 

Bushels 
per  acre. 
29.4 
30.5 
39.4 
59.1 
208.9 

Bushels 
per  acre. 
14.5 
13.8 
24.0 
28.7 
98.9 

Bushels 
per  acre. 
16.1 
15.8 
24.3 
30.3 
106.8 

Bushels. 
13.7 
11.3 
14.9 
27.7 
93.4 

Bushels. 
1.6 
2.0 
.3 
1.6 
7.6 

Per  cent. 
87.2 
58.8 
60.8 
85.8 
80.8 

Per  cent. 
10.9 

Wbeat.. 

14.2 

Barley...; 

1.2 

Oats 

6.7 

Potatoes 

7.6 

As  all  the  preceding  statements  concerning  the  acreage  yields  and 
production  in  Europe  and  the  United  States  are  based  on  official 
figures  which  readily  can  be  verified,  they  should  correct  the  aU  but 
universal  misconception  concerning  this  important  subject,  humiliat- 
ing though  the  truth  may  be. 

Conceding  the  fact,  which  can  be  substantiated  by  the  written 
words  of  Europe's  foremost  thinkers  of  the  past  century,  that  the 
beet-sugar  industry  more  than  any  one  or  all  other  causes  combined 
has  furnished  the  inspiration  which  has  resulted  in  placing  Europe  so 
far  in  advance  of  the  United  States  in  concrete  agricultural  results, 
the  question  naturally  arises  as  to  why  we  have  not  followed  more 
closely  in  Europe's  footsteps,  doubled  the  acreage  yield  of  our  staple 
crops,  and  produced  all  of  our  sugar  at  home,  instead  of  producing  but 
500,000  tons  of  beet  sugar  at  home  and  importing  2,500,000  tons, 
the  equivalent  of  what  Europe  exports  after  supplying  her  400,000,000 
inhabitants. 

Of  minor  causes,  there  are  several,  including  the  low  wage  rate  of 
Europe,  the  lower  price  for  beets,  the  fostering  care  of  their  govern- 
ments, extending  even  to  tlie  placing  of  large  bounties  on  sugar 
exports  in  order  that  they  might  compete  successfully  with  tropical 
sugars,  while  our  fiscal  system  has  been  unstable  and  vacillating, 
sometimes  affording  protection  to  home  producers  and  sometimes 
not.  Since  the  time  France  proliibited  the  importation  of  sugar  and 
estabhshed  the  beet-sugar  industry  in  that  nation,  the  United  States 
customs  duty  on  imported  sugar  has  undergone  thirteen  revisions, 
being  reduced  from  time  to  time  by  various  Congresses  from  10 
cents  per  pound  to  absolute  free  trade,  and  now  is  fixed  at  1.65  cents 
for  95°  and  1.9  cents  for  refined  sugar. 


14  INDIRECT  BENEFITS   OF   SUGAR-BEET  CULTURE. 

The  main  reason  why  we  produce  but  one-half  to  two-thirds  as 
many  bushels  of  grain  per  acre  as  does  Europe  is  because,  with  rare 
exceptions,  our  American  economists  have  failed  utterly  to  recognize 
the  beet-sugar  industry  as  the  father  of  modern  scientific  agriculture, 
the  very  fountain  head  of  inspiration  from  which  the  science  sprang, 
the  great  "normal  school"  of  agriculture  which  trains  the  indifferent 
farmer  to  be  an  expert  farmer,  because  of  the  fact  that  sugar  beets 
form  the  only  important  "agricultural  crop  which,  unless  the  price 
per  ton  be  exceedingly  high,  refuses  to  return  a  profit  or  even  expenses 
when  farmed  in  a  slip-shod  manner,  and  the  superior  methods  which 
the  farmer  is  forced  to  apply  to  beet  culture  gradually  are  applied 
to  the  production  of  other  crops  and  finally  are  adopted  by  neighbor- 
ing farmers,  even  though  they  raise  no  beets. 

It  was  beet  culture  that  forced  European  farmers  back  to  deep 
plowing,  compelled  them  to  clear  their  fields  of  weeds,  caused  them 
to  adopt  a  scientific  system  of  crop  rotation,  led  them  to  devise  new 
and  better  implements,  doubled  their  stock-carrying  capacity  as  well 
as  their  manure,  and  brought  them  to  a  better  realization  of  the  value 
of  barnyard  manure,  as  well  as  of  commercial  fertilizers,  and  as  a 
result  what  were  formerly  the  ''worn-out  soils  of  Europe"  now  are  so 
productive  as  to  make  our  "virgin  soils"  seem  barren  in  com^parison. 

While  American  economists  have  failed  to  recognize  the  sugar  beet 
as  the  father  of  modern  scientific  agriculture,  there  are  some  few  who 
realize  the  great  indirect  advantages  to  be  derived  from  the  culture 
of  beets,  but  even  they  have  failed  to  capitalize  and  put  in  concrete 
form  these  indirect  benefits  in  order  that  our  people  might  realize 
the  enormous  wealth  which  would  accrue  to  the  Nation  by  deriving 
our  sugar  supply  from  home-grown  beets.  As  in  teaching  the  farmers 
the  stress  has  been  laid  upon  "so  many  tons  of  beets  per  acre  at  so 
much  per  ton,"  so  in  teaching  the  people  the  main  stress  has  been 
laid  upon  keeping  a  hundred  or  two  millions  at  home  each  year  by- 
producing  our  sugar  at  home  instead  of  importing  it,  almost  uni- 
versally overlooking  the  far  more  important  and  valuable  indirect 
benefits. 

Having  failed  to  impress  the  farmers  Avith  the  rotation  value  of 
sugar  beets  and  the  enemies  of  the  industry  having  spread  broadcast 
the  erroneous  statement  that  sugar-beet  culture  injures  the  soil — • 
just  as  in  the  inception  of  the  industry  an  English  society  ofl'ered 
Achard  first  $30,000  and  then  $120,000  if  he  would  declare  his  process 
a  failure,  and  finally  induced  Sir  Humphrey  Davy  to  publish  a  work 
on  beet  sugar  in  which  he  declared  it  was  far  too  sour  for  consumption — 
the  average  American  farmer  has  been  slow  to  engage  in  beet  culture, 
even  at  prices  for  his  product  ranging  from  25  to  80  per  cent  in  excess 
of  the  prices  paid  for  richer  beets  in  Europe.  In  establishing  334 
beet-sugar  factories  in  as  many  localities  in  France  in  2  years. 
Napoleon  opened  334  schools  of  scientific  agriculture,  while  in  the 
33  years  since  the  establishment  of  our  first  successful  begt-sugar 
factory  we  have  created  but  66  such  schools,  concerning  which  the 
present  Secretary  of  Agriculture  says: 

Every  sugar-factory  management  in  this  country  must  necessarily  call  to  its  aid  a 
thoroughly  scientific  and  practical  agriculturist,  and  under  him  a  corps  of  assistants, 
equipped  and  conversant,  not  only  with  cultivating  sugar  beets,  but  familiar  with 
methods  of  culture,  fertilization,  drainage,  rotation,  and  all  the  necessary  scientific 
knowledge  to  produce  successfully  all  kinds  of  crops  indigenous  to  the  particular 


IFDIEECT  BENEFITS   OE   STJGAE-BEET  CULTUEE.  15 

locality.  This  agriculturist  and  his  assistants  are  constantly  traveling  over  the  sugar- 
beet  producing  district  of  this  particular  factory,  advising  farmers  particularly  in  the 
growth  of  beets,  and  generally  in  the  production  of  all  other  crops.  They  are  as 
much  interested  incidentally  in  the  handling  of  the  lands  producing  other  crops  as 
they  are  particularly  the  one  in  charge.  It  is  these  other  lands  that  will  produce 
Bugar  beets  next  year. 

A  sugar-factory  district  is  an  "extension  course"  in  agriculture  to  every  farmer  in 
the  district,  whether  he  be  growing  beets  or  not.  It  could  not  be  conceived,  with 
Buch  influences  constantly  in  operation,  that  the  sugar  industry  is  not  exerting  a 
potent  influence  most  favorable  in  production  of  all  crops. 

If  the  above-mentioned  truths,  no  truer  to-day  than  they  have  been 
at  any  time  during  the  past  century,  had  been  drilled  into  the  head 
of  every  farmer  boy  at  the  little  red  schoolhouse,  as  they  are  and 
have  been  in  Europe  since  the  tijne  of  Napoleon,  we  long  since  would 
have  been  producing  our  own  sugar  at  home  and,  because  of  our 
superior  soil,  chmate,  and  numerous  other  advantages,  our  acreage 
yields  of  all  other  crops  to-day  would  be  the  envy  instead  of  the  ridicule 
of  European  thinkers.  As  it  is;  we  have  missed  the  mark  completely. 
As  a  rule,  our  farmers  have  taken  the  shadow  for  the  substance. 
"So  many  tons  of  beets  per  acre  at  so  much  per  ton"  is  the  first  tiling 
considered  in  America  and  the  last  thing  in  Europe,  and  if  sugar 
beets  failed  to  yield  a  greater  direct  profit  than  do  other  crops,  the 
average  American  farmer  abandons  the  culture  and  applies  himself 
to  growing  the  more  easily  produced  cereals,  while  the  European 
farmer  will  grow  beets  at  a  considerable  direct  loss  latlier  than  to 
abandon  the  culture,  well  knowing  that  he  will  far  more  than  make 
up  any  losses  on  the  beet  crop  by  the  increased  yields  of  other  crops 
with  wliich,  for  three  years,  he  follows  beets.  It  unquestionably 
is  true  that,  because  of  the  exceedingly  low  world  price  of  sugar, 
Europe  long  ago  would  have  ceased  to  produce  sugar  for  export,  if 
not  for  home  consumption,  had  it  not  been  that  beet  culture  so 
greatly  increases  the  yield  of  all  other  crops. 

Instead  of  growing  beets  on  the  same  soil  year  after  year,  the 
European  farmer  rotates  them  with  other  crops,  sowing  them  on  the 
same  soil  as  infrequently  as  possible,  in  order  to  benefit  the  maximum 
area,  never  losing  sight  of  or  sacrificing  the  advantages  to  accrue 
for  the  following  three  j^ears,  while  tens  of  thousands  of  American 
farmers,  sowing  beets  only  for  the  direct  returns,  sow  them  on  the 
same  soil  year  after  year,  thereby  not  only  losing  the  greatest  profit 
beet  culture  afi^ords,  but  gradually  wearing  out  their  soils  as  they 
surely  will  be  worn  out  by  cropping  them  constantly  to  any  one  thing 
year  after  year  without  rotation. 

In  every  community  where  sugar  beets  are  produced,  there  are 
farmers  who,  by_  personal  experience,  have  learned  the  truths  which 
Napoleon  proclaimed  a  century  ago,  and  their  number  is  increasing 
yearly,  but  there  are  thousands  who  still  miss  the  main  feature  in  the 
culture  of  sugar  beets  as  thoroughly  as  one  would  miss  it  who  said  that 
a  farmer  painted  his  barn  red  in  order  to  provide  a  red  building  to  gaze  at. 
With  the  European  farmer  the  main  purpose  in  planting  sugar  beets  is 
to  increase  the  yield  of  his  other  crops  by  rotation  with  the  beets,  just 
as  the  primary  purpose  of  painting  a  barn  red  or  yellow  is  to  preserve 
the  wood.  With  the  European  farmer,  the  direct  returns  from  a  crop 
of  beets  are  as  truly  an  incident  as  is  the  color  of  the  barn. 

The  following  limited  selection  of  letters  and  reports  received  from 
farmers  located  in  beet  districts  from  Oliio  on  the  east  to  Washington 


16 


INDIKECT  BENEFITS   OF   SUGAR-BEET   CULTURE. 


on  the  west  is  sufficient  to  show  that  with  the  spread  of  the  beet-sugar 
industry  and  the  consequent  adoption  of  proper  cultural  methods,  the 
farmers  of  the  United  States  can  render  their  soils  even  more  pro- 
ductive than  are  the  rejuvenated  soils  of  Europe,  and  that  the  beneficial 
results  to  be  secured  from  the  introduction  of  this  crop  are  not  confined 
to  restricted  locaiities. 

While  corresponding  closely  with  other  reports  on  file,  the  number 
of  reports  herewith  produced  is  too  sm^all  to  be  used  as  a  basis  for  an 
accurate  calculation,  but  that  the  results  obtained  by  these  farmers 
approximate  the  results  that  are  obtained  by  other  equally  intelligent 
farmers  and  which  would  be  obtained  by  them  generally  with  the 
further  expansion  of  thebeet-sugarindustry,thereisno  reason  to  doubt. 

The  average  of  these  30  reports  shows  that  at  the  time  these  farmers 
introduced  beet  culture,  their  yield  of  wheat  was  92  per  cent  above 
the  United  States  average  yield  for  1907,  their  3deld  of  barley  Vv^as  37 
per  cent  higher,  and  their  yield  of  oats  was  70  per  cent  higher  than 
the  United  States  average.  Notwithstanding  this  fact,  by  the  intro- 
duction of  beet  culture  as  a  rotating  crop,  they  increased  their  acre- 
age yield  of  wheat  42.5  per  cent,  their  barley  78.6  per  cent,  and  their 
oats  71.8  per  cent.  If,  through  the  general  introduction  of  beet  cul- 
ture, all  of  our  farmers  should  increase  their  yields  of  wheat,  barley, 
and  oats  a  like  number  of  bushels  per  acre,  based  on  1909  farm-  prices, 
they  would  be  richer  by  a  billion  and  a  quarter  dollars  a  year,  and 
if  they  brought  their  yields  up  to  those  now  secured  by  these  farmers, 
their  extra  yield  of  these  three  crops,  on  the  same  acreage,  would  be 
worth  $2,000,000,000  a  year. 

The  average  acreage  yield  of  sugar  beets  secured  by  these  farmers 
was  14^  tons  per  acre.  One  report  on  alfalfa  shows  an  increase  of 
1  ton  and  another  of  2  tons  per  acre,  while  one  report  on  beans  shows 
an  increase  of  5  bushels  per  acre  and  another  6  bushels.  One 
report  on  potatoes  shows  an  increase  from  a  merely  nominal  yield,  to 
200  sacks,  or  nearly  three  times  the  average  United  States  yield. 
Whether  with  the  general  introduction  of  sugar-beet  culture,  the 
acreage  yields  of  all  our  farmers  would  be  increased  as  much,  or 
more  or  less,  can  not  be  determined.  That  they  could  do  it,  there 
is  no  question,  but  that  some  still  would  farm  in  a  shiftless  manner, 
is  altogether  probable. 

Averages  of  the  following  reports: 

Average  acreage  yield  of  wheat,  barley,  and  oats,  prior  and  subsequent  to  the  introduction 
of  sugar  beets  as  a  rotating  crop. 


Average  United  States  yield  per  acre,  1907 bushels.. 

Average  German  yield  per  acre,  1907 do  — 

Excess  German  yield  per  acre,  1907 do — 

Excess  German  yield  per  acre,  1907 per  cent. . 

Average  yield  per  acre  prior  to  sugar-beet  culture,  as  shown  by  following 

reports  of  American  farmers bushels . . 

Average  yield  per  acre  by  same  after  introducing  sugar  beets  as  a  rotating 

crop bushels. . 

Excess  yield  per  acre  caused  by  rotating  with  sugar  beets do  — 

Increase  in  yield  per  acre - per  cent. . 

Yield  per  acre  in  excess  of  United  States  1907  average  yield bushels.. 

Excess  of  United  States  1907  average  yield per  cent. , 

Yield  per  acre  in  excess  of  German  1907  average  yield bushels. 

Excess  of  German  1907  average  yield per  cent. 


AVheat. 


15.8 
30.5 
14.7 
93.0 

26.9 

43.6 
16.7 
42.5 
27.8 
176.0 
13.1 
43.0 


Barley. 


24.3 
39.4 
15.1 
C2.0 

32.7 

58.4 
25.7 
78.6 
34.1 
140. 0 
19.0 
48.0 


Oats. 


30.3 

59.1 
28.8 
95.0 

40.2 

69.1 
28.9 
71.8 
38.8 
127.0 
10.0 
16.0 


INDIEECT  BENEFITS   OF   SUGAR-BEET   CULTUEE.  17 

Keports  prom  American  Sugar-Beet  Growers,  Showing  Increased  Yield  op 
Other  Crops  by  Reason  of  Being  Rotated  with  Sugar  Beets. 

OHIO. 

We  are  well  satisfied  in  raising  other  crops  where  we  had  beets  before.  We  always 
raise  better  crops  on  our  beet  ground  than  on  our  other  ground.  We  have  had  sugar 
beets  four  years  and  always  find  satisfaction.  We  started  with  3  acres  and  this  year 
12  acres.  We  raised  wheat,  oats,  barley,  and  corn.  (Tony  Bast,  Graytown,  R.  F. 
D.,17.) 

We  are  now  raising  our  sixth  consecutive  crop  of  sugar  beets.  When  we  planted 
the  first  seed  we  were  told  that  the  beets  would  wear  out  the  soil;  that  the  sugar  com- 
pany were  swindlers  and  would  compel  the  farmers  to  pit  the  beets  till  winter;  that  jf 
the  beets  were  frostbitten  they  would  be  worthless.  We  have  yearly  realized  from 
|50  to  175  per  acre  for  the  beets  and,  moreover,  with  experience  we  are  ready  to  state 
that  we  always  grow  one- third  more  oats  or  barley  on  ground  where  beets  were  raised 
the  previous  year  than  on  ground  that  has  raised  no  beets.  (Jos.  Shiple  &  Sons, 
Perrysburg.) 

MICHIGAN. 

I  wish  to  say  that  I  have  grown  sugar  beets  for  the  last  three  years  and  I  can  truth- 
fully say  that  the  growing  of  sugar  beets  is  a  benefit  to  the  soil  if  the  crop  is  given 
proper  rotation.  I  have  received  the  best  results  by  following  the  crop  with  a  crop  of 
oats.  This  season  (1909)  I  thrashed  from  5  acres  of  measured  ground,  which  was  in 
sugar  beets  last  season,  270  bushels  of  oats,  or  an  average  of  54  bushels  per  acre.  The 
balance  of  my  oat  crop  which  was  on  ground  following  a  corn  crop  (equally  as  good  soil) 
is  yielding  about  40  bushels  per  acre.  Therefore  I  feel  that  I  am  justified  in  making 
this  statement.     (Alex.  Larkins,  Carleton.) 

I  have  raised  beets  for  the  last  seven  years  and  have  averaged  about  16  tons  per 
acre.  I  also  find  that  oats  will  do  better  on  the  ground  where  I  raise  beets  than  they 
will  on  other  ground.  This  year  the  oats  on  my  beet  ground  produced  75  bushels  per 
acre,  while  the  others  only  produced  about  60  bushels  per  acre.  (Sam  Seizert, 
Blissfield.) 

In  regard  to  beet  culture,  I  wish  to  say  that  I  have  raised  sugar  beets  for  six  years 
and  consider  it  one  of  the  most  profitable  crops  that  a  farmer  can  raise.  Not  only 
because  he  gets  the  greater  return  for  his  labor,  when  they  are  properly  cared  for,  but 
because  the  ground  is  left  in  the  best  possible  condition  for  the  next  crop,  for  since 
raising  sugar  beets  my  land  has  been  gradually  increasing  her  yield  per  acre.  The 
increase  in  yield  of  oats  has  been  from  15  to  25  per  cent,  or  from  40  or  45  to  55  bushels 
per  acre,  and  on  wheat  the  increase  has  been  about  the  same.  When  I  have  raised 
beets  two  consecutive  years  on  the  same  piece  of  ground  and  then  sowed  oats  thejf 
were  extra.  We  as  farmers  are  satisfied  that  we  get  better  crops  since  raising  beets. 
(S.  S.  Teed,  Middleton.) 

In  regard  to  the  condition  of  ground  that  beets  have  been  grown  on,  will  say  that 
I  have  grown  beets  quite  extensively  and  find  that  it  is  an  improvement  rather  than 
a  detriment  to  the  soil.  In  1901 1  grew  2  acres  of  beets;  went  about  18  tons  per  acre; 
followed  with  beets,  besides  adding  29  acres,  making  31  acres  for  1902,  average 
yield,  about  llj  tons.  Out  of  31  acres,  17  acres  to  beans  following,  yielding  14  bushels 
per  acre.  Same  12  acres  to  wheat  yielding  37  bushels  per  acre,  following  with  the 
biggest  crop  of  hay  ever  cut  in  the  neighborhood,  and  5  acres  of  17-acre  bean  ground 
went  to  oats  the  following  spring,  yielding  53  bushels  besides  one- third  loss  on  account 
of  being  lodged,  average  for  year  in  neighborhood  being  about  27  bushels.  In  1904 
had  2^  acres  of  beets,  yielding  about  9  tons,  following  with  oats  yielding  45  bushels 
per  acre;  average  in  neighborhood,  about  30  bushels  per  acre.  In  1905  had  40  acres 
of  beets,  8  tons;  following  8  acres  to  beets  again,  yielding  about  10  tons  second  year; 
following  next  with  oats  yielding  51  bushels  per  acre.  Balance  of  40  acres,  12  acres 
went  to  beans;  balance  of  20  acres  were  sown  to  oats,  yielding  about  47  bushels  per 
acre;  following  same  with  wheat,  yielding  about  28  bushels,  when  average  in  neigh- 
borhood was  about  13  bushels.  In  1906,  had  14  acres  to  beets,  about  10  tons  yield, 
following  same  with  14  acres  to  oats,  yielding  about  47  bushels  per  acre;  then  to 
wheat,  yielding  28  bushels  per  acre;  average  for  wheat  that  year  in  neighborhood 
about  13  bushels  per  acre.  In  1907  had  17  acres  in  beets,  average  about  11  tons.  Of 
17  acres  3  acres  went  to  oats,  and  seeded  6  acres  to  beets  again,  yielding  about  the  same, 
and  balance  of  17  acres,  or  8  acres,  went  to  oats,  yielding  68  bushels  per  acre;  then  to 
wheat,  yielding  this  year  38  bushels  per  acre,  and  good  seeding  in  sight.  In  1908  had 
15  acres  of  beets,  about  10  tons  average  yield;  12  acres  now  to  oats  with  a  prospect  for 

S.  Doc.  76,  62-1 2 


18  INDIRECT  BENEFITS   OF   SUGAR-BEET  CULTURB. 

a  bumper  crop,  and  balance  of  15  acres,  or  3  acres,  are  to  beets  again  tbis  year.  This 
year  have  26  acres  to  beets  with  good  prospect  for  11  or  12  tons.  This  report  was  made 
and  kept  on  one  of  my  "eighties."  On  the  other  have  grown  in  the  last  four  seasons; 
including  13  acres  this  year,  71  acres,  with  about  the  same  results  in  regard  to  follow- 
ing crops,  although  have  no  record  of  different  fields  and  yield.  (W.  J.  Davis,' 
Sunfield.) 

It  gives  me  great  pleasure  in  having  a  chance  to  show  to  my  brother  farmers  the  lit- 
tle I  know  about  sugar  beets  placing  the  soil  in  a  better  mechanical  condition  for  other 
grain  crops  than  any  other  crop  in  the  rotation.  On  a  6-acre  lot  of  beets  I  harvested 
11  tons  per  acre  of  beets.  I  followed  the  beets  with  barley  and  got  50  bushels  per  acre,' 
an  increase  of  50  per  cent  as  compared  with,  crops  raised  by  my  neighbors  and  m-yself 
formerly.  The  above  6  acres  was  put  to  wheat  after  the  barley  and  made  35  bushels 
per  acre,  and  the  stand  of  clover  is  good  for  sore  eyes.  I  am  more  than  satisfied  with 
the  beets,  not  alone  for  the  money  crop,  but  also  the  permanent  good  to  the  land. 
(W.  L.  Huber,  Charlotte.) 

WISCONSIN. 

J.  L.  Walsh,  of  Beloit,  reports  that  with  a  farm  of  which  400  acres  are  under  cultiva- 
tion, the  principal  crops  being  cabbage,  sugar  beets,  oats,  onions,  and  clover,  has 
gro'svn  sugar  beets  for  five  years  and  has  75  acres  of  beets  which,  under  normal  condi- 
tions, yield  18  tons  per  acre.  Follows  a  four-year  rotation,  including  cabbages  two  years; 
beets  one  year,  oats  and  clover.  Follows  sugar  beets  with  grain  and  clover,  then 
cabbages.  Plows  7  inches  deep,  and  disks  and  harrows  until  seed  bed  is  perfect. 
Uses  barnyard  manure  and  commercial  fertilizer.  Hoes  his  beets  twice  and  culti- 
vates with  a  horse  seven  or  eight  times.  Raised  46  bushels  of  oats  to  the  acre  on  a 
37-acre  field,  which  the  following  year  was  put  to  beets,  and  the  following  year  har- 
vested 107  bushels  of  oats  to  the  acre,  while  his  yield  from  a  7-acre  field  of  potatoes 
which  before  produced  between  75  and  90  bushels,  after  beets  increased  to  225  bushels. 
He  says:  "I  grew  150  acres  of  beets  in  1907,  and  in  1908  the  same  land  and  100  addi- 
tional acres  to  beets  on  the  same  farm.  In  1909  the  whole  was  sown  to  oats  and  pro- 
duced 87  bushels  per  acre." 

In  reply  to  your  letter  concerning  the  number  of  bushels  of  grain  raised  on  sugar- 
beet  ground,  will  say  that  from  11  acres  of  sugar-beet  ground  I  raised  783  bushels  of 
oats  this  year  (71  bushels  per  acre),  and  tiiat  was  all  the  oats  I  had  sowed  this  year. 
The  other  farms  joining  mine  only  had  a  yield  of  between  30  to  40  bushels.  Mr, 
Stieneke,  one  of  my  neighbors,  raised  over  75  bushels  of  oats  to  the  acre  on  sugar-beet 
land.     (Dell  Tuttle,  Ripon.) 

For  the  past  seven  years  I  have  had  from  2  acres  to  30  acres  of  beets — sugar  beets — 
on  this  farm.  I  always  have  found  sugar-beet  land  the  best  for  small  grain,  oats  and 
barley  and  clover  and  timothy,  of  any  land;  much  better  than  corn  land.  I  find  a 
crop  of  sugar  beets  well  cared  for,  pays  as  good  as  any  crop  at  high  prices,  and  the  best 
crop  to  clear  the  land  of  all  foul  weeds,  including  quack  and  Canada  thistle.  On  a 
15-acre  lot  where  sugar  beets  were  raised  last  year,  1908,  I  thrashed  and  sold  600 
bushels  of  barley  (40  bushels  per  acre)  which  graded  47  pounds  per  bushel.  Thirty 
bushels  barley  per  acre  is  a  good  crop  here.  On  an  18-acre  lot  where  11  acres  sugar 
beets  and  6  acres  cucumbers  and  1  acre  com  were  raised  last  year,  1908,  I  thrashed 
1,000  bushels  oats.  On  the  cucumber  land  the  oats  were  weedy,  rusty,  and  lodged 
very  green,  which  made  a  good  60  bushels  of  oats  per  acre  on  the  sugar-beet  land. 
Forty  to  50  bushels  of  oats  per  acre  is  a  good  crop  here.     (R.  M.  Sherwood,  Ripon.) 

IOWA. 

In  1908  I  grew  3  acres  of  sugar  beets  for  the  Iowa  Sugar  Co.,  receiving  12  tons  per 
acre.  In  1909  I  planted  the  same  ground  to  corn.  Adjoining  the  3  acres  of  beets  I 
broke  up  some  new  land  and  planted  it  to  corn.  During  the  growing  season  the  com 
on  the  new  land  stood  taller  than  the  corn  on  the  beet  ground.  When  I  husked  the 
com  this  fall,  the  yield  from  the  beet  ground  was  70  bushels  per  acre,  and  the  yield 
from  the  new  ground  was  60  bushels  per  acre.  In  my  estimation,  beets  do  not  hurt 
the  ground,  but  improve  it  for  the  next  crop.     (C.  Grimm,  Cresco.) 

Followed  beets  with  oats,  1909,  20-acre  field.  Field  seeded  to  clover  and  hay  taken 
off  the  year  before  the  beets.  Beets  went  from  12  to  13  tons  per  acre.  Oats  thrashed 
out  65  bushels  per  acre  and  weighed  out  70  bushels  per  acre,  average  for  20  acrea, 
the  champion  yield  in  Iowa  for  1909.     (Leonard  Miller,  Waverly.) 

E.  H.  MaUory,  of  Hampton,  has  a  200-acre  farm  and  has  44  acres  in  beets,  which 
have  increased  his  yield  of  com  from  50  bushels  to  60  bushels,  and  oats  averaging  from 
20  to  30  bushels  have  increased  to  50  bushels. 


HJTDIEECT  BENEFITS   OF   SIJGAE-BEET  CULTURE.  19 

KANSAS. 

A.  R.  Downing,  of  Deerfield,  reports  a  field  of  alfalfa  plowed  up  several  years  ago 
and  put  to  wheat,  yielding  45  bushels  per  acre.  The  field  was  then  planted  to  beeta 
three  years  in  succession  and  was  then  followed  by  oats,  yielding  73  bushels  per  acre. 
The  oats  were  followed  by  wheat,  which  gave  a  yield  of  53  bushels  per  acre. 

Mr.  CarlCoerber,  of  Deerfield,  plowed  up  a  field  of  alfalfa  and  put  it  in  wheat,  which 
gave  an  average  yield  of  35  bushels  per  acre.  This  was  followed  by  beets  for  two  years, 
then  oats  one  year,  and  wheat  following  the  oats  gave  a  yield  of  45  bushels  per  acre. 

NEBRASKA. 

James  R.  White,  of  Hershey,  route  1,  reports  that  he  farms  210  acres.  Principal 
crops  alfalfa,  beets,  corn,  and  oats.  Has  grown  sugar  beets  for  five  years.  Has  15 
acres  in  beets,  which  usually  yield  14  tons  to  the  acre.  Plows  9  to  10  inches  deep. 
Harrows  four  times.  Fertilizes  with  barnyard  manure.  Hoes  twice  and  cultivates 
six  times.  A  15-acre  field  of  oats  prior  to  beet  culture  yielded  35  bushels  to  the  acre; 
after  being  in  beets  two  years,  yielded  50  bushels  to  the  acre.  A  30-acre  field  of 
alfalfa,  which  yielded  4  tons  to  the  acre  prior  to  beet  culture,  yielded  6  tons  to  the 
acre  after  having  been  planted  to  beets  three  years. 

S.  E.  Solomon,  of  Culbertson,  reports  that  he  has  a  1,000-acre  sandy-loam  farm; 
with  800  acres  under  cultivation  to  wheat,  corn,  potatoes,  sugar  beets,  and  alfalfa. 
Has  300  acres  in  sugar  beets;  has  grown  beets  for  eight  years,  and  averages  10  tons  per 
acre.  He  says:  "Never  practiced  sj^stem  of  rotation;  am  not  following  a  system,  but 
should  do  so.  Depth  of  plowing,  6  inches;  should  be  12;  use  no  fertilizer.  Am  not 
employing  any  system  of  fertilization  or  rotation.  Hand  hoe  beets  one  or  two  times; 
horse  cultivate  two  or  three  times.  Am  positive  that  rotation  and  fertilization  would 
double  average  yields. _  The  most  slipshod  methods  are  employed  in  growing  beets 
in  this  section.  What  is  needed  is  deep  plowing,  careful  rotation,  and  use  of  barnyard 
manures.  Have- had  enough  experience  to  fully  demonstrate  this."  [Frank,  but 
foolish.] 

COLORADO. 

Lee  Kelim,  of  Loveland,  a  large  landowner,  formerly  the  owner  of  the  Loveland  mill, 
and  who  has  operated  thrashing  machines  in  that  vicinity  for  25  years,  says  that  previ- 
ous to  the  starting  of  beet  growing,  20  to  25  bushels  of  wheat  was  considered  a  large 
crop,  and  that  out  of  this  they  would  screen  15  to  20  pounds  of  wild  oats.  Now  40  to  50 
bushels  is  considered  an  average  crop,  and  he  feels  safe  in  saying  that  in  the  Loveland 
district  the  introduction  of  beets  into  the  crop  rotation  has  increased  the  yield  of  grain 
100  per  cent,  and  has  cleaned  the  country  of  the  wild  oats  pest. 

J.  L.  Sybrandt,  of  Berthoud,  reports  that  he  has  a  360-acre  farm,  of  which  290  acres 
are  under  cultivation  to  wheat,  oats,  alfalfa,  barley,  potatoes,  and  68  acres  to  sugar 
beets,  which  average  12  tons  per  acre  and  which  he  rotates  with  other  crops  every  three 
to  five  years,  and  fertilizes  his  ground  with  sheep  manure.  He  has  grown  beets  for 
four  years  and  has  increased  his  wheat  yield  of  20  to  30  bushels  to  56  bushels  per  acre, 
and  his  barley  yield  from  30  to  40  bushels  to  65  bushels  per  acre. 

David  Snider,  of  Platteville,  reports  that  he  has  a  2,000-acre  farm,  of  which  he  culti- 
vates 1,200  acres  to  alfalfa,  wheat,  oats,  barley,  potatoes,  and  sugar  beets,  of  which  he 
had  in  400  acres.  Has  grown  sugar  beets  for  six  years,  secured  a  yield  of  13^  to  18  tons 
per  acre  and  rotates  them  with  other  crops,  following  them  with  wheat  or  barley. 
Plows  his  land  10  inches  deep.  Has  increased  his  wheat  yield  from  30  to  35  bushels 
to  35  to  50  bushels  per  acre;  his  oats  from  20  to  25  bushels  to  60  to  75  bushels;  his  bar- 
ley from  25  to  30  bushels  to  70  to  85  bushels;  and  his  potatoes  from  a  nominal  yield  to 
200  sacks  per  acre. 

The  Taylor-Fuller  Mercantile  Co.,  of  Avondale,  report  that  they  have  been  farming 
for  14  years,  operating  a  120-acre  farm,  of  which  100  acres  are  in  cultivation.  They 
have  grown  sugar  beets  for  eight  years  and  average  14  tons  to  the  acre,  rotating  beets 
with  other  crops.  By  rotating  with  beets  they  have  increased  their  wheat  yield  from 
25  to  40  bushels  per  acre;  oats  from  30  to  50  bushels;  beans  from  12  to  18  bushels;  and 
hay  from  3  to  4  tons  per  acre.  They  say :  ' ' Before  the  introduction  of  sugar-beet  raising 
farming  was  conducted  in  a  very  loose  way,  and  as  it  is  impossible  to  raise  sugar  beets 
at  a  profit  without  employing  the  best  farming  methods,  it  has  made  better  farmers, 
and  they  have  found  the  same  pay  with  any  crop.  For  some  reason  grain  and  in  fact 
all  other  crops  do  well  following  beets,  although  the  land  may  be  worn  out  for  sugar 
beets."  [Note. — In  this  section  it  has  been  customary  to  follow  the  "gravel-pit'! 
method  of  farming,  and  grow  beets  on  the  same  soil  year  after  year  without  rotation," 
with  the  inevitable  result  that  the  land  finally  refuses  to  produce  a  paying  crop  of 


20  IXDIEECT  BENEFITS  OP  SUGAK-BEET  CULTURE* 

beets  until  it  has  been  rested  from  this  crop.    As  well  try  to  eat  a  quail  every  day  for 
a  month  as  to  try  to  farm  in  this  manner.    In  both  cases,  nature  rebels.] 

J.  Reimer,  of  Pueblo,  reports  that  he  has  been  farming  in  that  section  14  years  and 
has  50  acres  in  cultivation,  of  which  13  acres  are  in  beets.  Has  grown  beets  5  years 
and  averages  14  tons  per  acre.  Plows  10  inches  deep,  harrows  four  times,  hand  hoea 
three  times,  horse  cultivates  four  times,  fertilizes  with  stable  manure.  Rotation  with 
sugar  beets  has  increased  his  corn  yield  from  20  to  30  bushels  per  acre;  oats  from  40 
to  65  bushels;  rye,  no  increase  from  40  bushels;  beans  from  15  to  20  bushels;  and  no 
increase  in  his  alfalfa  crop  of  5  tons  per  acre. 

MONTANA. 

John  B.  Clewett,  of  Promberg,  reports  that  he  is  operating  a  425-acre  farm,  with  150 
acres  under  cultivation,  60  being  to  beets;  secured  yield  of  15  tons  of  beets  per  acre. 
A  tract  of  22  acres  which  yielded  27  bushels  of  wheat  per  acre  prior  to  beet  culture 
was  put  into  beets  for  three  consecutive  years,  when  it  yielded  45  bushels  of  wheat 
per  acre.  His  oat  crop  increased  from  60  bushels  to  80  bushels  under  like  conditions. 
He  says:  "Beet  cultivation  is  a  good  thing  for  the  character  of  soil  in  this  district,  aa 
it  seems  to  fertilize  and  increase  the  production  of  grain  two  or  three  seasons  after 
rotation.'' 

UTAH. 

W.  T.  Wyment,  Warren,  Weber  County,  reports  10  acres  to  beets.  Previous  to 
raising  beets  this  land  produced  25  bushels  of  wheat  to  the  acre.  Beets  were  grown 
on  the  land  for  three  years,  after  which  it  was  planted  in  wheat  again,  producing 
45  bushels  to  the  acre,  an  increase  of  20 .bushels  to  the  acre. 

J.  F.  Stoddard,  Hooper,  Weber  County,  reports  5  acres  to  beets.  Previous  to  grow- 
ing beets  the  land  produced  35  bushels  of  barley  to  the  acre.  Beets  were  grown  on 
this  land  for  four  successive  years,  after  which  the  land  was  planted  to  barley  again 
and  produced  55  bushels  to  the  acre,  an  increase  of  20  bushels  to  the  acre. 

Thomas  Jones,  Hooper,  Weber  County,  rejoorts  10  acres  to  beets.  Previous  to  plant- 
ing of  beets,  this  land  produced  20  bushels  of  wheat  to  the  acre.  After  growing  beeta 
for  three  successive  years  it  was  again  planted  in  wheat  and  produced  55  bushels  to 
the  acre,  an  increase  of  15  bushels  per  acre. 


George  A.  Pincock,  of  Sugar  City,  reports  that  he  has  grown  sugar  beets  for  five 
years  and  has  50  acres  in  beets,  averaging  15  tons  per  acre.  Prior  to  beet  culture,  hia 
wheat  yielded  25  to  30  bushels;  following  beets,  50  to  60  bushels.  Oats,  prior  to  beets, 
40  to  46  bushels;  following  beets,  75  to  100  bushels.  Barley,  prior  to  beets,  40  to  60 
bushels;  following  beets,  75  to  100  bushels.  He  says:  "I  see  these  yields  prevailing 
wherever  beets  have  been  raised." 

WASHINGTON. 

James  Hays,  of  Waverly,  reports  a  yield  of  80  bushels  of  oats  after  spring  plowing, 
and  100  bushels  following  beets;  of  wheat,  after  spring  plowing,  40  bushels,  and  50 
bushels  after  beets,  this  being  the  average  during  a  period  of  several  years. 

F.  Kienbaum,  of  Waverly,  reports  his  oat  yield  at  60  bushels  after  spring  plowing,' 
and  90  bushels  on  beet  land;  wheat,  30  bushels  after  spring  plowing,  and  50  bushels  on 
beet  land. 

A.  D.  Thayer,  of  Waverly,  reports  yield  of  45  bushels  of  oats  after  spring  plowing,- 
and  100  buslaels  on  his  beet  land;  wheat,  35  bushels  after  summer  fallow,  and  45 
bushels  after  beets. 

William  Connolly,  of  Waverly,  reports  yield  of  75  bushels  of  oats  after  spring  plow- 
ing, and  85  to  95  bushels  after  beets;  wheat,  40  bushels  after  summer  fallow,  and  50 
bushels  follo->ving  beets. 

CALIFORNIA. 

D.  J.  Miu-phy,  of  Chico,  superintendent  of  the  heirs  of  James  Phelan,  operating  an 
8,000-acre  farm  with  3,000  acres  under  cultivation,  has  grown  sugar  beets  for  five 
years  and  has  600  acres  to  beets.  Secures  yield  of  12  to  20  tons  and  practices  a  rota- 
tion system  consisting  of  wheat,  followed  by  barley,  then  pasture  of  voluntary  wheat 
or  barley,  followed  by  sugar  beets.  Plows  12  inches  deep.  Reports  an  increase  in 
yield  of  wheat,  due  to  sugar-beet  rotation,  from  10  to  12  bags  of  138  pounds  each  (23  to 
27^  bushels)  to  15  bags  of  140  pounds  each  (35  bushels);  of  barley,  from  16  bags  of 
108  pounds  each  (36  bushels)  to  24  bags  of  108  pounds  each  (54  bushels). 


INDIEECT  BENEFITS   OE  SUGAE-BEET  CULTUEE.  21 

First  Deceee  of  Napoleon  Providing  i'or  the  Encouragement  oe  the  Beet- 
Sugar  Industry. 

Palace  of  the  Tuileries,  March  23,  1811. 

Napoleon,  Emperor  of  the  French,  etc. 

Upon  a  report  of  a  commission  appointed  to  examine  the  means  proposed  to  natu- 
ralize, upon  the  continent  of  om*  Empire,  sugar,  indigo,  cotton,  and  divers  other 
productions  of  the  two  Indies; 

Upon  presentation  made  to  us  of  a  considerable  quantity  of  beet-root  sugar  refined, 
crystallized,  and  possessing  all  the  properties  of  cane  sugar; 

Upon  presentation  made  to  us  at  the  council  of  commerce  of  a  great  quantity  of 
indigo  extracted  from  the  plant  woad,  which  our  Departments  of  the  south  produce 
in  abundance,  and  which  indigo  has  all  the  properties  of  the  indigo  of  the  two  Indies; 

Having  reason  to  expect  that  by  means  of  these  two  precious  discoveries  our  Empire 
will  shortly  be  relieved  from  an  exportation  of  100,000,000  francs  hitherto  necessary 
for  supplying  the  consumption  of  sugar  and  indigo; 

We  have  decreed  and  do  decree  as  follows: 

Article  1.  Plantations  of  beet  root  proper  for  the  manufacture  of  sugar  shall  be 
formed  in  our  Empire  to  the  extent  of  32,000  hectares  (79,040  acres). 

Art.  2.  Our  minister  of  the  interior  shall  distribute  32,000  hectares  among  the 
Departments  of  our  Empire,  taking  into  consideration  those  Departments  where  the 
culture  of  tobacco  may  be  established  and  those  which  from  the  nature  of  the  soil 
may  be  more  favorable  to  the  culture  of  the  beet  root. 

Art.  3.  Om'  prefects  shall  take  measure  that  the  number  of  hectares  allotted  to 
their  respective  Departments  shall  be  in  full  cultivation  this  year,  or  next  year  at 
the  latest. 

Art.  4.  A  certain  number  of  hectares  shall  be  laid  out  in  our  Empire  in  plantations 
of  w^oad  proper  to  the  manufacture  of  indigo  in  the  proportion  necessary  for  our 
manufacture.       ' 

Art.  5.  Our  minister  of  the  interior  shall  distribute  the  said  number  among  the 
Departments  beyond  the  Alps  and  those  of  the  south,  where  this  branch  of  industry 
formerly  made  great  progress. 

Art.  6.  Our  prefects  shall  take  measure  that  the  number  of  hectares  allotted  to 
their  Departments  shall  be  in  full  cultivation  next  year  at  the  latest. 

Art.  7.  The  commission  shall,  before  the  4th  of  May,  fix  upon  the  most  conven- 
ient places  for  the  establishment  of  six  experimental  schools  for  giving  instruction  in 
the  manufacture  of  beet-root  sugar  conformably  to  the  processes  of  chemists. 

Art.  8.  The  commission  shall  also,  before  the  same  date,  fix  upon  the  places  most 
convenient  for  the  establishment  of  four  experimental  schools  for  giving  instruction 
upon  the  extraction  of  indigo  from  the  leaves  of  woad  according  to  the  processes 
approved  by  the  commission. 

Art.  9.  Our  minister  of  the  interior  shall  make  known  to  the  prefects  in  what  places 
these  schools  shall  be  formed  and  to  which  pupils  destined  to  this  manufacture  should 
be  sent.  Proprietors  and  farmers  who  may  wish  to  attend  a  com'se  of  lectures  in  the 
said  experimental  schools  shall  be  admitted  thereto. 

Art.  10.  Messrs.  Barruel  and  Isnard,  who  have  brought  to  perfection. the  processes 
for  extracting  sugar  from  the  beet  root,  shall  be  specially  charged  with  the  direction 
of  two  of  the  six  experimental  schools. 

Art.  11.  Our  minister  of  the  interior  shall,  in  consequence,  cause  to  be  paid  the 
Bum  necessary  for  the  formation  of  the  said  establishments,  which  sum  shall  be  charged 
to  the  fund  of  1,000,000  francs  ($200,000)  in  the  budget  of  1811  at  the  disposal  of  the 
said  minister  for  the  encouragement  of  beet-root  sugar  and  woad  indigo. 

Art.  12.  From  the  1st  of  January,  1813,  and  upon  a  report  to  be  macle  to  our  minister 
of  the  interior,  the  sugar  and  indigo  of  the  two  Indies  shall  be  prohibited  and  con- 
sidered as  merchandise  of  English  manufacture  or  proceeding  from  English  commerce. 

Art.  13.  Our  minister  of  the  interior  is  charged  with  the  execution  of  the  present 
decree. 


Decree  op  Napoleon,  January  15,  1812. 

Section  1.— School  for  manufacture  ofleet-root  sugar. 

Article  1.  The  factory  of  Messrs.  Barruel  &  Chappelet,  plain  of  Vertus,  and  those 
established  at  Wachenheim,  Department  of  Mont-Tonnere,  at  Douai,  (Strasbourg,  and 
at  Castelnaudary  are  established  as  special  schools  for  the  manufacture  of  beet-root 
BUgar. 


22  INDIRECT  BENEFITS   OP   SUGAR-BEET  CULTURE. 

Art.  2.  One  hundred  students  shall  be  attached  to  these  schools,  viz,  40  at  that 
of  Messrs.  Barruel  &  Chappelet,  and  15  at  each  of  those  at  Wachenheim,  Douai,  Stras- 
bourg, and  Castelnaudary ;  total,  100. 

Art.  3.  These  students  shall  be  selected  from  among  students  in  medicine,  phar- 
macy, and  chemistry. 

Section  II. — Culture  of  beets. 

Art.  4.  Our  minister  of  the  interior  shall  take  measure  to  cause  to  be  sown  through- 
out our  Empire  100,000  metrical  arpents  (150,000  acres)  of  beets.  The  conditions  of 
the  distribution  of  the  culture  shall  be  printed  and  sent  to  the  prefects  previous  to 
February  15. 

Section  III. — Manufacture. 

Art.  5.  There  shall  be  accorded  throughout  our  entire  Empire  500  licenses  for  the 
iju.,nufacture  of  beet-root  sugar. 

Art.  6.  These  licenses  shall  be  accorded  of  preference-^ 

To  all  proprietors  of  factories  or  refineries. 

To  all  who  have  manufactured  sugar  during  1811. 

To  all  who  have  made  preparations  and  expenditures  for  the  establishment  of 
factories  for  work  in  1812. 

Art.  7.  Of  these  licenses  shall  be  accorded  of  right,  one  to  each  Department. 

Art.  8.  Prefects  shall  write  to  all  proprietors  of  refineries,  in  order  that  they  may 
make  their  submissions  for  the  establishment  of  the  said  factories  at  the  close  of  1812. 
In  default  on  the  part  of  proprietors  of  refineries  to  have  made  their  submissions 
prior  to  March  15,  or  at  the  latest  April  15,  they  shall  be  considered  as  having  renounced 
the  preference  accorded  them. 

Art.  9.  Licenses  shall  include  an  obligation  on  the  part  of  those  who  shall  obtain 
them  to  establish  a  factory  capable  of  producing  at  least  10,000  kilograms  (22,000 
pounds)  of  raw  sugar  in  1812-13. 

Art.  10.  Each  individual  who,  having  secured  a  license,  shall  have  actually  man- 
ufactured nearly  10,000  kilograms  of  raw  sugar  resulting  from  the  crop  of  1812  to  1813, 
shall  have  the  privilege  and  assurance,  by  way  of  encouragement,  of  being  subject 
to  no  tax,  or  octroi,  upon  the  product  of  his  manufacture  for  the  space  of  four  years. 

Art.  11.  Each  individual  who  shall  perfect  the  manufacture  of  sugar  in  such  a 
manner  as  to  obtain  a  larger  quantity  from  the  beet,  or  who  shall  invent  a  more  simple 
and  economical  method  of  manufacture,  shall  obtain  a  license  for  a  longer  time,  with 
the  assurance  that  no  duty  nor  octroi  shall  be  placed  upon  the  product  of  his  manu- 
facture during  the  continuance  of  his  license. 

Section  IV. — Creation  of  four  imperial  factories. 

Art.  12.  Four  imperial  beet-sugar  factories  shall  be  established  in  1812  under  the 
care  of  our  minister  of  the  interior. 

Art.  13.  These  factories  shall  be  so  arranged  as  to  produce  with  the  crop  of  1812 
to  1813,  2,000,000  kilograms  (4,409,200  pounds)  of  raw  sugar. 

o 


XJLUKA^KY    of 

Nicht  einzelm  Im  Buchhandel  kdufiich!  JkLA>«'*f><:'']%Tis;*»f  hk 

JAN  £71912 


Abdruck 

>  aus  dem 

CENTRALBLATT 

fur 

Bakteriolop,  Parasilenknnile  M  Infeklionskrankheilen 

Zweite  Abteilung: 

Allgemeine,  landwirtschaftlich-technologische 

Bakteriologie,  Garungsphysiologie, 

Pflanzenpathologie  und  Pflanzenschutz. 

In  Verbindung  mit 

Prof.  Dr.  Adametz  in  Wien,  Prof.  Dr.  J.  Behrens,  Direktor  der 

biologischen  Anstalt  zu  Dahlen-Berlin,  Prof.  Dr.  M.  W.  Beijerinck  in  Delft, 

Geh.  Reg.-Rat  Prof.  Dr.  Delbruck  in  Berlin,  Prof.  Dr.  Lindau  in  Berlin,  Prof. 

Dr.  Lindner  in  Berlin,   Prof.  Dr.  MiUler-Thurgau  in  Wadensweil,  Prof.  Dr. 

M.  C.  Potter,  Durham  College  of  Science,  New-castle-upon-T5^ne,  Prof.  Dr. 

Samuel  C.  Prescott   in  Boston,   Dr.  Erwin  F.  Smith  in  Washington,  D.  C, 

U.  S.  A.,  Prof.  Dr.  Stutzer  in  Konigsberg  i.  Pr.,  Prof.  Dr.  Van  Laer  in  Gand, 

Prof.  Dr.  Wehmer  in  Hannover,  Prof.  Dr.   Weigmann  in  Kiel  und  Prof.  Dr. 

Winogradsky  in  St.  Petersburg 

herausgegeben  von 

Prof.  Dr.  O.  Uhlw^orm  in  Berlin  W.  15,  Hohenzollerndamm4lI. 

und 

Prof.  Dr.  Emil  Chr.  Hansen  in  Kopenhagen. 

XXIII.  Band,    1909. 

Verlag  von  Gustav  Fischer  in  Jena. 


